Matchmaker Discussion Thread & MM Balance

[ACe_1983]

4 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

Not true

Yes true. Wanna continue?

 

Quote

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.

Yes true. You are the one that is biased. Most players are, I think it's safe to assume, casual players. Definitely not the kind of players who would regularly trash a T10 in a T8. 10k battles is no longer an inexperienced average player (I am actually willing to bet you're probably on the "really good stats" side...).

[DFens_666]

4 minutes ago, ACe_1983 said:

I don't really understand why the hostility (and all that gratuitous patronizing) since really - I complain about this BECAUSE I like the game.

 

Because we know nothing will change? You could write till your hands blead - WG will not listen to you, me or anyone else. Believe me, we all have written tons of ideas how to improve this game - literally nothing happens. Well, one time when >90% of the community wanted something, WG did change that after like 6 months or so, so that should tell you something.

And why we are answering the way we do right now: Because if you ask for help, you would get better answers (from the same people btw) and ultimatively, thats the only thing which will change your attitude. If you throw in the towel before anything happened, thats entirely on you.

If you think, its frustrating to be -2tier ship in a battle, we cant help you with that. The only thing we can do, is to help you understand the things you dont understand right now, but that requires you to want to learn in the first place...

[ACe_1983]

6 minutes ago, GarrusBrutus said:

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.

I don't feel offended. And yes, you may be right, I might lean towards 1 vs 1 situation.

 

And you're right with the whole "pull your weight" thing - this is precisely what I'm talking about. It seems reasonable to me to have any player have a decent chance of impacting the game. I mean a game should have the player skill (assimilate team here), the player role and of course RNG. That's the top 3 ingredients that should determine a match. And that makes it fun.

 

What I'm saying is that I see no good reason why adding such a huge new criteria (and again - taken one for one, a T5/T6 vs T7/T8, there's a huge difference...) is necessary.

 

Look... Why is having a -/+2 Tier better than a sane same-tier MM? Especially since this is the only thing that's taken into account - not some type of "skill-determining-numbers-analysis".

 

And as for your last observations - yesterday I player some 30 games I think. I distinctly remember that there were 2 games. TWO (and I remember that simply because I said to myself WOW!!!) where I was top tier. And there were I think 2 or 3 more games with all-T5 ships. So.... two games with a T5 where there were some T4 too. Today I have some 10 games... or maybe a bit more. Anyway, not ONE was with the same tier, not even going to dream about top tier.

 

If this was something like maybe 50/50 then yeah, maybe it wouldn't be that bad. But consistently I keep playing games where in order to pull my weight, solo (because, since you pointed this out, it may be an important biased pov), I simply have to play a game that neither fun nor frankly teaches me much. In order to learn I need to have the chance to apply things.

 

Anyway, I still don;t get it you guys defending this. How is such a system "more fair" than a same tier MM? The only people that have an advantage is higher tiered ships. With, of course, T10 on top. Really curious how many T10 - only games there are...

[ColonelPete]

36 minutes ago, ACe_1983 said:

1. 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?
2. 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...).
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. I don't really understand why the hostility (and all that gratuitous patronizing) since really - I complain about this BECAUSE I like the game.

1. It is the same with a CS player with handgun vs fully equipped player with assault rifle. Thx to to the rock-paper-scissor system of WoWs a Tier V DD deals fine with a Tier VII BB and a Tier V BB does fine vs a Tier VII CA
2. No. Teams played rounds in CS. You could join a team at the start of a new round and started with a handgun while other players had more advanced equipment from the rounds before.
3. The same in WoWs. When you chose the Tier X, you meet on average different teams when chosing a Tier VIII.
4. You wrote "So basically if you complain that CS had no MM, then newsflash - neither does WoWS"
5. You complain about something that is ok for you in another game.

[ACe_1983]

9 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Because we know nothing will change? You could write till your hands blead - WG will not listen to you, me or anyone else. Believe me, we all have written tons of ideas how to improve this game - literally nothing happens. Well, one time when >90% of the community wanted something, WG did change that after like 6 months or so, so that should tell you something.

And why we are answering the way we do right now: Because if you ask for help, you would get better answers (from the same people btw) and ultimatively, thats the only thing which will change your attitude. If you throw in the towel before anything happened, thats entirely on you.

If you think, its frustrating to be -2tier ship in a battle, we cant help you with that. The only thing we can do, is to help you understand the things you dont understand right now, but that requires you to want to learn in the first place...

I have no problem with anything you said (well, obviously except the part that from what you;re saying WG is worse than the Blizzard... :))) ).

 

I do have a problem though with people saying that I shouldn't be frustrated with an obviously flawed mechanism and that somehow that is fair.

 

But otherwise sure - I'll say this again. I didn't say I'm not a newb. I am learning, and I think I'm making good progress. And I can tell the difference between a bad system or just my bad skills. You don't hear me complain playing in a T5 and getting two salvoed by some BB because I fancy showing him my broadside for like 1 min, do I?

 

Quote

The only thing we can do, is to help you understand the things you dont understand right now, but that requires you to want to learn in the first place...

...and this one though, I can;t really NOT take offense. This is patronizing as hell, and frankly having someone talking about how they perceive a system to be flawed does not necessarily equal not wanting to learn :)

[159Hunter]

1 minute ago, ACe_1983 said:

I don't feel offended. And yes, you may be right, I might lean towards 1 vs 1 situation.

And that is wrong, it is a teamgame after all. If you only look at 1 vs 1 then yes, +2/-2 MM is a problem. However when you look at the team aspect it's ok.

1 minute ago, ACe_1983 said:

And you're right with the whole "pull your weight" thing - this is precisely what I'm talking about. It seems reasonable to me to have any player have a decent chance of impacting the game. I mean a game should have the player skill (assimilate team here), the player role and of course RNG. That's the top 3 ingredients that should determine a match. And that makes it fun.

Well if you are an awesome player in a bottom tier ship your weight on the match will be higher than that of a top tier player without a clue. So skill is there.

The player role is there, and some classes will have bigger influence than others. So player role is there.

RNG is present in large quantities. So present.

Guess fun is present for you?

1 minute ago, ACe_1983 said:

What I'm saying is that I see no good reason why adding such a huge new criteria (and again - taken one for one, a T5/T6 vs T7/T8, there's a huge difference...) is necessary.

 

Look... Why is having a -/+2 Tier better than a sane same-tier MM? Especially since this is the only thing that's taken into account - not some type of "skill-determining-numbers-analysis".

Because it gives more versatility in the matches. Always fighting the same tier = the same ships gets boring quicker.

 

[Bear__Necessities]

And here lies the reason I'm taking a break. Inexperience players blaming everything that they feel is wrong,  other than looking at themselves and asking, what am I doing not so well and how can I improve and what am I doing right and can get better at. Then make long ranty posts rather than ask for help, advice etc, criticise and game that's being going 5 years strong already instead and when get called out on it, suddenly go uber defensive and hark back to glory days on an utterly different game etc etc etc. Boring.

[ACe_1983]

21 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

Nah. boring. I know im right. Its your loss. Continue, young padawan. Much to learn you have.

May 4 is gone so no more SW memes 'till next year, ok?

[CptBarney]

3 minutes ago, Bear__Necessities said:

And here lies the reason I'm taking a break. Inexperience players blaming everything that they feel is wrong,  other than looking at themselves and asking, what am I doing not so well and how can I improve and what am I doing right and can get better at. Then make long ranty posts rather than ask for help, advice etc, criticise and game that's being going 5 years strong already instead and when get called out on it, suddenly go uber defensive and hark back to glory days on an utterly different game etc etc etc. Boring.

True, you get this on the UA:d forums as well, everyone knows the game is in closed alpha but you get the ocassional sod who feels the need to start blaming mechanics (which are not even a year old yet btw and have changed 3 times significantly and 1 minor change up till now) and how complex the ship designer is (apprently clicking on hull then selecting a hull then select which tower you want and placing it on the plus signs is difficult). Calling it arcane and needing a 'manual' jesus christ lol.

 

Regardless even though i won all my games today, the enemies have been utter shite, had a new mexico who was so bad he didn't even know how to press x on his keyboard to target me, since everytime he fired his salvo would fall noticebly short before my ship (i mean really noticeable not one shell landed withint 300metres). Nevermind the usual suicidal DD's (especially ones that sit in smoke and get torped on both teams) and BB's refusing to push-in (mostly on the enemies for once).

 

Most games have been stomps so far, few have been close deciders.  Shame really. Reminds me of that guy in gen chat over 30k games but 41% winrate but blames his team, never understood such behaviour.

 

eitherway take care bear and stay safe admist this bloody disease. 'w'

[ACe_1983]

19 minutes ago, Bear__Necessities said:

And here lies the reason I'm taking a break. Inexperience players blaming everything that they feel is wrong,  other than looking at themselves and asking, what am I doing not so well and how can I improve and what am I doing right and can get better at. Then make long ranty posts rather than ask for help, advice etc, criticise and game that's being going 5 years strong already instead and when get called out on it, suddenly go uber defensive and hark back to glory days on an utterly different game etc etc etc. Boring.

WOW!

 

I get uber defensive? So lemme get this straight - I criticize the game and instead of explaining WHY this is not valid (like @159Hunter for example, who is the only one actually bringing arguments - like for example underlining the fact that my view may not be the correct one) and you get some schmucks on their high horse basically using the "you're newb so you're wrong"... "argument".

 

Nice to see that other communities, whom seem to not lack for... well, for people like you, are not special.

[Bear__Necessities]

2 minutes ago, CptBarney said:

True, you get this on the UA:d forums as well, everyone knows the game is in closed alpha but you get the ocassional sod who feels the need to start blaming mechanics (which are not even a year old yet btw and have changed 3 times significantly and 1 minor change up till now) and how complex the ship designer is (apprently clicking on hull then selecting a hull then select which tower you want and placing it on the plus signs is difficult). Calling it arcane and needing a 'manual' jesus christ lol.

 

Regardless even though i won all my games today, the enemies have been utter shite, had a new mexico who was so bad he didn't even know how to press x on his keyboard to target me, since everytime he fired his salvo would fall noticebly short before my ship (i mean really noticeable not one shell landed withint 300metres). Nevermind the usual suicidal DD's (especially ones that sit in smoke and get torped on both teams) and BB's refusing to push-in (mostly on the enemies for once).

 

Most games have been stomps so far, few have been close deciders.  Shame really. Reminds me of that guy in gen chat over 30k games but 41% winrate but blames his team, never understood such behaviour.

 

eitherway take care bear and stay safe admist this bloody disease. 'w'

What's most annoying is the missed opportunity here. 

 

I'll lay it out so @ACe_1983 can have a think on it.

 

Positives. 

1. Found the fourm. So many players don't even know this places exists and could have a wealth of knowledge at their finger tips. Use us to you benefit. I've got over 14,000 games played. I was not very good at the start, yet decided to learn and have go soooo much better. Ask how. You'd be surprised at what is out there to help learn this game. 

2. Has admitted to not having that much in game experience. That's good. That shows a willingness to have some insight at yourself. I also note that you may have not played that many games and that isn't a bad thing. Because I'm going to bring that up in point 3.

3. You have not rushed. You have stayed in the learning tiers. You haven't gone and out and spaffed a fortune on high prem ships and gone blind into high tie games. That's a good thing. 

 

So. I suggest try starting a new post. One asking for advice and help on a line you're interested in learning. It works well that way. Ask @Saltface.

[ACe_1983]

28 minutes ago, 159Hunter said:

And that is wrong, it is a teamgame after all. If you only look at 1 vs 1 then yes, +2/-2 MM is a problem. However when you look at the team aspect it's ok.

Well if you are an awesome player in a bottom tier ship your weight on the match will be higher than that of a top tier player without a clue. So skill is there.

The player role is there, and some classes will have bigger influence than others. So player role is there.

RNG is present in large quantities. So present.

Guess fun is present for you?

Because it gives more versatility in the matches. Always fighting the same tier = the same ships gets boring quicker.

 

 

look, you make sense... ok?

 

ut maan, I gotta say, I'd take your definition of "boring" over a full day where you;re the underdog. I mean If it were because I'm new to the game - sure. I'll take that, no problem.

 

And how could it be boring? You've got quite a lot of ships at the same tier, of the same type. For me frankly boring means shooting at some pea-shooter 2 Tiers below me knowing that I'll citadel him/her easily with one salvo. He is a nuisance, that's all.

 

So for me, you making sense and having a same-tier MM (and for that guy that said I said there is no MM - I was responding to his thing... which he conveniently ignored, the "If you...." part) are not really exclusive. So you making sense does not give an "explanation" to why this is the way it is. Part of it, maybe.

 

But OK... Thank you for your attitude :)

 

Seeing how people mostly trash while giving you the self righteous speech I guess I'd rather waste my time in yet another one of those super f....un T6 vs T8 games. Because they are definitely NOT the norm :D

 

P.S. Please don't tell me that when I get to T7 it's the same s...thing!!!

[CptBarney]

1 minute ago, ACe_1983 said:

 

look, you make sense... ok?

 

ut maan, I gotta say, I'd take your definition of "boring" over a full day where you;re the underdog. I mean If it were because I'm new to the game - sure. I'll take that, no problem.

 

And how could it be boring? You've got quite a lot of ships at the same tier, of the same type. For me frankly boring means shooting at some pea-shooter 2 Tiers below me knowing that I'll citadel him/her easily with one salvo. He is a nuisance, that's all.

 

So for me, you making sense and having a same-tier MM (and for that guy that said I said there is no MM - I was responding to his thing... which he conveniently ignored, the "If you...." part) are not really exclusive. So you making sense does not give an "explanation" to why this is the way it is. Part of it, maybe.

 

But OK... Thank you for your attitude :)

 

Seeing how people mostly trash while giving you the self righteous speech I guess I'd rather waste my time in yet another one of those super f....un T6 vs T8 games. Because they are definitely NOT the norm :D

 

P.S. Please don't tell me that when I get to T7 it's the same s...thing!!!

The reason why the mm is the way its is comes down to money and also variety (believe it or not), you facing lower tiers or higher tiers is nothing new and not dealing with that fact can be an issue when you climb up the tiers till you get to tier 9 and 10 (10 you will always be top tier and 9 only tier 10 is above you).

 

I've had games bottom tier (quite a few actually) where i topped the leaderboard and not just in BB's either, DD's CV's, Cruisers etc. What this means is that dealing with higher tier ships is mostly down to player skill and experience along with some luck (mainly teams and rng) and the ship you have.

 

If you think mm is bad here try world of tanks beta where you could face tier 10 as a tier 4, hell i face a maus in M6 tier 6 americna heavy, couldn't do sod all. But either way i kept playing since i knew there was a way to deal with said tank regardless.

 

If your bottom tier in a tier 6 cruiser then don't rush out, play cautiously, same with any ship, especially dd's since tier 6 is where you will start facing more and more hydro and more radar.

 

We can't help you if you don't help yourself, theres a reason why some of are good at the game, ask us and you will learn.

[ACe_1983]

25 minutes ago, CptBarney said:

The reason why the mm is the way its is comes down to money and also variety (believe it or not), you facing lower tiers or higher tiers is nothing new and not dealing with that fact can be an issue when you climb up the tiers till you get to tier 9 and 10 (10 you will always be top tier and 9 only tier 10 is above you).

 

I've had games bottom tier (quite a few actually) where i topped the leaderboard and not just in BB's either, DD's CV's, Cruisers etc. What this means is that dealing with higher tier ships is mostly down to player skill and experience along with some luck (mainly teams and rng) and the ship you have.

 

If you think mm is bad here try world of tanks beta where you could face tier 10 as a tier 4, hell i face a maus in M6 tier 6 americna heavy, couldn't do sod all. But either way i kept playing since i knew there was a way to deal with said tank regardless.

 

If your bottom tier in a tier 6 cruiser then don't rush out, play cautiously, same with any ship, especially dd's since tier 6 is where you will start facing more and more hydro and more radar.

 

We can't help you if you don't help yourself, theres a reason why some of are good at the game, ask us and you will learn.

 

Ok: money, I get it. variety - i get it. this is why i did not complain about +/- 1 tier. but +/- 2 tier is excessive as hell in my (yeah, i'll say it again, nooobish) opinion. problem is that assessing that it's insane to have -/+ 2 tiers diff doesn't actually require one being more than a noob, albeit a noob that has slowly reached this wall.

 

what most of you seem to suffer from is a kind of "survivor" bias. the fact that you, who are very good at the game, can deal with such a big difference, doesn't mean that the system is OK. The fact that you found yourself in the position of being survivors even when matched unfavorably doesn't mean that most other do.  It also doesn't mean that "dealing with higher tier ships is "mostly down to player skill and experience along with some luck (mainly teams and rng)" because you will never describe as fair having two of you, similarly experienced players, one fighting in a T6 and the other in a T8. Seriously, don't even try selling that stuff.

 

I don't know if there are any ESL championships, probably there are (I'll google some after posting...). But I'm willing to bet that if there are, then for sure the teams are comprised of at most +/- 1 tier ships (if not outright same tier). Why? Because that means, first and foremost, having a level playing field.

 

Skill is "the factor" when all else (or mostly all else) is the same. And you guys, being so experienced, have lost sight of the fact (and it is a fact) that you guys are already top dog. Obviously, you are among the best, no matter how you feel about it, since if everyone would be as good as you then you'd no longer have such high win percentages. Pure and simple. Check your stats - and whatever percentage you have means that those X% that you have as win rate it's a loss for others.

 

So basically, all your arguments - "yeah, it can be done" while technically true (of course it can be done) they cannot possibly be arguments for a fair MM system. The apply to you - sure - you can do it. But this is simply because your skills outweigh the difference in level. Simply because you represent that 10% (or however large that percentage is) and frankly such a system only benefits you (top dogs). The rest of 90% get shafted by such a biased system. And no, having you banging your head against a wall is no good way to learn something. And definitely having others smash their brains to the same wall, because it's OK - you've had it worse or just about the same - is not an argument either.

 

It benefits top dogs because:

1. Ship wise - you already have top tier ships so basically you all get easier games by being matched mostly with lower tier ships.

 

2. Skill wise - being top dog means that if the system puts you in your own bracket (assuming you'd have such a sane system, as you see in other games where players actually favor advocating for a fair system instead of defending a broken one) then you'd meet mostly other top dog. So, basically, you get placed well below your skill most of the time.

 

3. Such a system just makes it even worse for normal (average) players than I thought. I mean you guys can handle, and even get some nice games in a T6 vs T8 situation (assuming you really can manage it just as you say it) - so given that you're in the, say, top 10%, it means that such games are even more one sided. The chance that the enemy team gets a good player to fill that T6 is slim to none.

 

Again, @159Hunter, @CptBarney, why wouldn't a system of just +/-1 be good enough to achieve this "variety" and we need a +/-2 system? If you can handle it now, surely you'd be able to handle that too. On the other hand, it would take away from the frustration your average player - yeah, that player you get your high percentages against - has when going into this king of games.

 

I mean - Ok, for the umpteenth time: yeah, I'm the newbest of them all - and don't mind it. But that doesn't mean I'm wrong, not on that ground alone.

 

So, how come precisely when the differences between ships become more and more obvious (in terms of firepower, performance etc) you get a +/- 2 tier difference. Why not just +/- 1 like it happens at lower tiers (or maybe I missed that even at lower tiers you get this +/- 2 thing?).

 

Why not having a MM system that's based on stats + tiers, so then you could actually argument that a 2 tier difference is not such an issue. Or, God forbid having the developers figuring out how to make sense of all that DB info, at least keep the +/- 1 difference? What's the harm in that?

 

P.S.

Quote

If your bottom tier in a tier 6 cruiser then don't rush out, play cautiously, same with any ship, especially dd's since tier 6 is where you will start facing more and more hydro and more radar.

Thank you (really, no sarcasm) for the advice. And thank you for confirming the obvious, which, if you'll read carefully, I already figured out (again, not a swipe at your otherwise honest advice) since basically there are only 2 choices (especially for a player that's not really in that "for all us who know the game" club...).

1 - you have a death wish and play normally, but given how much of an underdog you are you're going to get wrecked anyway without having any meaningful impact on the battle (most of the time)

2 - you sit it out and go in only when it's safe or useless (meaning when your team is already winning the battle, without you contributing to it, or when your team is losing the battle and you can;t do squat to prevent it anyway - if you could you'd have gone for option 1)

 

And herein lies the issue, that the system forces you, T5 -> T8 at least, into this stupid playstyle.

 

Anyway, for those that took their time, I appreciate. For the rest - from my perspective, you've got an un-constructive attitude, to put it mildly. And I may be noob here, in this situation, but I've also been in the position to give others lessons and advice more than once and oh boy, it's no wonder that a lot of people avoid the forums (that some of you hint at... players not even knowing there's a forum...).

 

Have fun 

[ColonelPete]

39 minutes ago, ACe_1983 said:

It benefits top dogs because:

1. Ship wise - you already have top tier ships so basically you all get easier games by being matched mostly with lower tier ships.

 

2. Skill wise - being top dog means that if the system puts you in your own bracket (assuming you'd have such a sane system, as you see in other games where players actually favor advocating for a fair system instead of defending a broken one) then you'd meet mostly other top dog. So, basically, you get placed well below your skill most of the time.

 

3. Such a system just makes it even worse for normal (average) players than I thought. I mean you guys can handle, and even get some nice games in a T6 vs T8 situation (assuming you really can manage it just as you say it) - so given that you're in the, say, top 10%, it means that such games are even more one sided. The chance that the enemy team gets a good player to fill that T6 is slim to none.

 

1. Most players have a lower winrating on their higher Tier ships. In other words, most player lose more on their Tier X ships than on their Tier VI ships, despite being top Tier all the time. When you call that benefit...
2. There are not enough players for "own brackets" in Random battles. And you would need a system to define "brackets". That does not really work well in Random, but can work in different game modes.
3. Bad players struggle vs same Tier enemies. They just cannot compensate their lack of skill. With same Tier MM, they would suffer all the time. With being top Tier from time to time, they compensate their lack of skill with stronger ships and have more pleasant battles. And you said yourself before, that being more skilled is fine.

[CptBarney]

@ACe_1983 i actually dont mind having a -1/+1 mm system the only reason why we get you to learn how to deal with being bottom tier and how to play better top tier is because weegee will never chage the system, i spent awhile on the world of tanks forums trying to suggest said mm system but wargaming wont have it.

 

So all i can do is give advice and tips on certain things because i seriously doubt we will see the mm changee at all.

 

Plus you may see suggest things that are obvious thats due to with how many players actually fail to notice this either due lack of experience, unwillingness, delusions at thinking they are better when they are not (ususlly players with 5k+ games and refuse to play better or learn anything).

 

I had to put up with a far harsh system on wot’s and compared to it wows is actually more forgiving due to howevery ship can damage every ship (in some way), you just need to learn the ships that you are grinding so you know what to expect later on and be better prepared for it in-general.

 

remember positioning and map awareness are vital go for dd’s where and when you can as they will be the death of you (either due to perma spotting if they are dumb they might let you spot them for longer than is nessecary or via torps).

 

everyone has to experience the same mm, so its just best to learn how to play your ship bottom, mid and top tier. I’ve noticed there isnt a guide for every single ship nor ones (not for every ship) detailing the above, but check out flamu, ichasegaming, notser, aerroon, toptier, flambass, and anyone else who uploads to youtube but also provides guides.

 

I was bottom tier in schoers tier 7 against tier 9 won both games and got 86k and 100k with around 5 kills altogether, but then schoers is a good kiting cruiser.

 

besides this i have nothing else too say but enjoy the game i guess. I mean i was very bad at world of tanks like 45% after 3k games but eventually got better aftttteeeerrr iii askeeed foooorr help

 

 

[CptBarney]

Sorry my ipad is meeeesseeed atttm.

[ACe_1983]

1 minute ago, ColonelPete said:

Bad players struggle vs same Tier enemies. They just cannot compensate their lack of skill. With same Tier MM, they would suffer all the time. With being top Tier from time to time, they compensate their lack of skill with stronger ships and have more pleasant battles. And you said yourself before, that being more skilled is fine.

Sorry, just couldn't help but call you on this. Come'on!

 

First, let's get this straight. Bad players doesn't mean 90% of the players (or the rest which are not up there with the 10% - of which you probably are part of it too :) ). Bad players means the exact opposite - the lower 10%. Say 20%. The rest are normal players. Average. The backbone of any game.

 

Yes, bad players will struggle against even lower tier. But wait... what? "With being top Tier from time to time, they compensate their lack of skill with stronger ships and have more pleasant battles." WOWWOWOWOW :))))) That's one smelly one...So wait, you're trying to sell this as something that would actually help bad players. Bad players are bad players - this will not help them. What will help them get better is a gradual learning curve, not giving them 5 games where they get deleted in the 1st minute by +2 lvl ships and then another 5 games where they get deleted within the 1st 5 minutes by -2 lvl ships. Whoopee! That'll surely make them perform better.

 

No sir - this +/-2 tier only benefits top players. Don't try to sell this as something that helps bad players or even the average player. The average player will get a lot of the games undertiered, and it will be a very unfun/frustrating experience for him/her, because while still decent, doesn't have enough to compensate for the difference in tiers. I'm talking about most of the player base here. And frankly there were some state running around this thread that showed that more than 33% of the games (was it 39%?)for T5/T6 were MM with +2 Tier ships.

 

If benefits top players because even in the worst case scenario, if they get undertiered - the other team has a low chance of getting a similarly skilled player in the T5/T6 spots (given that top players, by the very definition, are rate right?). So - even if undertiered, they will compensate for with their skills (which is perfectly fine, and nobody's complaining about that, not me at least - that's the point of the game).

 

Look, don't get me wrong. At this point, when I get into a game, I expect a better player to kick me in the nuts. It is normal and perfectly fair. Why? Well, beside the obvious thing that he's better it's because he's better. But that doesn't mean that beside learning the hard way how to be as good as them, I also have to overcome the disadvantage of having a (in most cases waaaay) worse ship. That simply doesn't make sense any sense (if you argue that's for the benefit of the average or even bad player) and definitely a more just -/+1 t system doesn't contradict the mantra that a better skilled player should beat a less skilled player.

 

This -/+ 2 lvl will teach normal players nothing really. I don't know if you have kids, but let me tell you, trying to teach your kid how to play Chess by sometimes having half his peons and his queen deleted and obviously moping the floor with him, the rest of times you starting with half the peons gone and no queen - but skill beating the crap out of him because you can compensate with skill, is still not a good strategy. If you want to teach him how to play you start slow, with scenarios that allow for mistakes (T1 - T2 - T3) and gradually more advanced (T4 - ... wait... why'd it stop???).

 

And me coming to the forums is not what the average player does, so the only source of "learning" is from the games themselves. And what most players learn is that starting with T5 you're either lucky, useless or you don't give a sh..t and just headlong into stuff. Thus - you don't learn, except how frustrating it is and maybe it's a better idea to get a premium ship.

 

Funnily enough I see top players complaining about how the higher ranks have been filled with.. how do you call them? potatoes? :)) Anyway => duh! Of course you're going to have that, because most players will try to skip this T5 -> ... straight to T9/T10. Why? Because it's stupid - it forces you to either be overly non-committal (so beside being cautious, you get nothing out of it... heck, it might teach you bad non-team playing behavior), suicidal (we can agree that's not fine either)  or simply stop giving a crap and just care about how to get creds and XP for the next ship (so play for the grind)...

 

as for 

Quote

Add you would need a system to define "brackets". 

Why define a new one when you already have the ship tier system. Yeah, not perfect, but since when you're concerned about the differences between ships tiered the same when you seem to have no issue with having huge differences between ships two tiers apart? And why wouldn't it work well in random?

[DFens_666]

1 hour ago, ACe_1983 said:

So basically, all your arguments - "yeah, it can be done" while technically true (of course it can be done) they cannot possibly be arguments for a fair MM system. The apply to you - sure - you can do it. But this is simply because your skills outweigh the difference in level. Simply because you represent that 10% (or however large that percentage is) and frankly such a system only benefits you (top dogs). The rest of 90% get shafted by such a biased system. And no, having you banging your head against a wall is no good way to learn something. And definitely having others smash their brains to the same wall, because it's OK - you've had it worse or just about the same - is not an argument either.

 

It benefits top dogs because:

1. Ship wise - you already have top tier ships so basically you all get easier games by being matched mostly with lower tier ships. 

 

2. Skill wise - being top dog means that if the system puts you in your own bracket (assuming you'd have such a sane system, as you see in other games where players actually favor advocating for a fair system instead of defending a broken one) then you'd meet mostly other top dog. So, basically, you get placed well below your skill most of the time.

 

3. Such a system just makes it even worse for normal (average) players than I thought. I mean you guys can handle, and even get some nice games in a T6 vs T8 situation (assuming you really can manage it just as you say it) - so given that you're in the, say, top 10%, it means that such games are even more one sided. The chance that the enemy team gets a good player to fill that T6 is slim to none.

 

You assume, that we only play T10 all day long only because we have those ships - which is wrong.

Here a list of my battles by tier

T8, which was most of the time (only recently it got slightly better) considered to be THE worst tier in the game, is my most played one.

 

Also id like to add, that single tier MM actually favours good players. Why? Here an example:

1 Good and 1 Average player face each other with different scenarios:

- The good player is Toptier, clearly he has the upper hand, as he is the superior player and has a stronger ship

- Both players are same tier, the good player has still the advantage, because well, he is still the better player.

- The average player is toptier, this levels the playing field, since now the average player has the better ship. While the better player might outplay him, he has to put more effort in and potentially loses more health or he might even die.

So if an average player is toptier, he has occasionally the change to perform better, while even tier MM he would always struggle against superior players.

 

edit:

well i essentially wrote what @ColonelPete said...

 

[ACe_1983]

17 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

 

Also id like to add, that single tier MM actually favours good players. Why? Here an example:

1 Good and 1 Average player face each other with different scenarios:

- The good player is Toptier, clearly he has the upper hand, as he is the superior player and has a stronger ship

- Both players are same tier, the good player has still the advantage, because well, he is still the better player.

- The average player is toptier, this levels the playing field, since now the average player has the better ship. While the better player might outplay him, he has to put more effort in and potentially loses more health or he might even die.

So if an average player is toptier, he has occasionally the change to perform better, while even tier MM he would always struggle against superior players.

 

 

haha... such a good joke.

 

1st of all, it's your choice. You can play for fun in that T8 ship and then when you've had enough you can kick some [edited]in another ship. And again, having you undertiered is not as bad anyway, since you can easily compensate for it.

 

+ I'm pretty sure you're very well aware why all those things you said are not applicable. They would be applicable if average players would get top tiered at least as often as they get undertiered. let me give you a hint. played another game right now. nothing new, out of all games today, i NEVER got top tiered (10+ games). All my games today were either same tier (2) or undertiered (the rest). ALL.

 

Yesterday got 2 same tier and 2 top tiered, out of... 30 games, maybe more.

 

Moreover, there's someone who said that you get more XP and such... And in a very nice way told me that hey, I should pay basically "L2P", because you do get extra rewards when undertiered.

 

Well, I played my Leander, undertiered. It's already not an easy ship to play, if you're undertiered any salvo can potentially wipe you. Moreover, you get spotted much easier than same tier, your penetration against DDs is crap and so on. Basically, to survive, it's assist from the sides (can't run to cap or i'll get deleted and certainly can't shoot since my range is no longer than a BB's captain spit range) and go in when the battle is mostly won already.

 

So yeah, I know, I'm a noob, so those stats are not impressive at all. Didn't say that they should be, nor did I expect them to be (one thing though, the high rate of missed AP is because I was in smoke, given that i was pointed by 2 BBs + 1 CA some 17 km away... and had no other targets to shoot at  other than a DD which was under smoke. So for lack of anything else to do I started shooting blindly towards where the DD might be... as well as launch a salvo of torpedoes)

 

But this is not what I wanted to show you - good or bad, the numbers... damn I didn't think I'd survive this. But just going to do battle to survive, each and every time is frankly... dunno if I can use that word on the forums. And what makes it worse is the XP i got and the creds. 28k creds and 900 XP. And that's when I win. And obviously the team I get placed wins maybe 50% of the games. Out of those I manage to survive maybe 25% of the times.

 

Heck, I'd get more fun and not go broke playing coop, 2 games and I get as much as grinding one stupid infuriating random game.

 

Because those rewards are frankly... crap. For a game where you basically are lucky to come out alive (unless you go sit in a corner and hope your team will win without you anyway).

 

 

 

[tsounts]

Since yesterday evening the amount of horrible players is just beyond belief! It's as if it's rigged or something...

[DFens_666]

1 hour ago, ACe_1983 said:

They would be applicable if average players would get top tiered at least as often as they get undertiered. let me give you a hint. played another game right now. nothing new, out of all games today, i NEVER got top tiered (10+ games). All my games today were either same tier (2) or undertiered (the rest). ALL. 

 

Yesterday got 2 same tier and 2 top tiered, out of... 30 games, maybe more. 

 

You will get a certain amount of toptier matches guaranteed by MM, but you need to play a certain amount for it to function. And the problem with that is, that the higher you go, the more players you get, its simple math that you cant be toptier that often (noone can). If most people play T10, and it drops going down, naturally you will be lowtier more frequently. However, that wasnt always like that, like a year ago playing T8 you were literally 80%+ lowtier. Which actually wasnt a big problem, but people kept whining so WG changed the MM.

Now people whine about facing T8 ships on T6 and T8-9 ships on T7 - which actually is a bigger problem than T8 ships facing T10...

 

1 hour ago, ACe_1983 said:

Moreover, there's someone who said that you get more XP and such

If you swap Amagi for Fuso and Asashio for Fubuki, you would have gotten less XP. And rewards for damage are percentage based: 22k on a BB is like ~4k on a DD.

 

1 hour ago, ACe_1983 said:

Well, I played my Leander, undertiered. It's already not an easy ship to play,

Well yes, because RN CLs are amongst the hardest ships to play properly, but their potential is good if you know how to. Its not a line for beginners, so its expected that you struggle with them.

[ForlornSailor]

1 hour ago, ACe_1983 said:

I played my Leander, undertiered. It's already not an easy ship to play

 

Its literally one of the easiest and at the same time strongest T6 cruisers out there. And Leander doesnt care about beeing low tiered. Her concealment / smoke firing penatly is better then Fijis.

 

1 hour ago, ACe_1983 said:

Moreover, you get spotted much easier than same tier

 

Wrong. Leander outspots every cruiser she meets. Every - single - one up into T8.

 

1 hour ago, ACe_1983 said:

your penetration against DDs is crap

 

Another completly wrong statement. Please learn about penetration and DD armor. Leander is a DD killer with its rapid firing RN AP.

 

1 hour ago, ACe_1983 said:

makes it worse is the XP i got and the creds. 28k creds and 900 XP.

 26k damage... you fired only 100 shots with a hitrate of 22%. What do you expect?

 

 

[ACe_1983]

4 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Well yes, because RN CLs are amongst the hardest ships to play properly, but their potential is good if you know how to. Its not a line for beginners, so its expected that you struggle with them.

I hope you didn't get me wrong... I'm not complaining. I find those ships absolutely enjoying and rewarding, if given the chance. The problem is that when you get tiered with T7 / T8 then I simply melt before even getting into a position where I can smoke up, or I can ambush and so on. Anyway, still learning, watching vids on how to play them. But definitely did not want to complain (my last double strike achievement, or whatever it's called, was in the Emerald...).

 

Quote

You will get a certain amount of toptier matches guaranteed by MM, but you need to play a certain amount for it to function. And the problem with that is, that the higher you go, the more players you get, its simple math that you cant be toptier that often (noone can). If most people play T10, and it drops going down, naturally you will be lowtier more frequently. However, that wasnt always like that, like a year ago playing T8 you were literally 80%+ lowtier. Which actually wasnt a big problem, but people kept whining so WG changed the MM.

Now people whine about facing T8 ships on T6 and T8-9 ships on T7 - which actually is a bigger problem than T8 ships facing T10...

I don't get it. The player distribution should have less players the more you go up in tier.

 

And since I posted last time, I played two more games, T6. Guess what... Yep, none were I was the top tier. Again, not complaining that I'm not top tier, but def. complaining for being the underdog in almost ALL games. And it's not worth much to have a game "guaranteed" once in a while where you're not forced to run and hide or suicide like a maniac.

 

Quote

If you swap Amagi for Fuso and Asashio for Fubuki, you would have gotten less XP. And rewards for damage are percentage based: 22k on a BB is like ~4k on a DD.

You're missing the point. I got more xp, like what. Seriously, I don't know the numbers, but I'll bet it's not that much. 10%? 20%?.. even 50% more is still a joke. In such games a T6 is overmatched anyway in range, armor etc. And those are the easily quantifiable ones. You get spotted immediately, because of the range there's no contest even. You do less damage anyway, not even going to mention that because of the whole situation you spend a lot more time dodging any incoming fire because any incoming fire means game over (if one of those T8 BB or CA get a full salvo on you).

 

So again, the scaling of the rewards is trash. 

[ColonelPete]

6 hours ago, ACe_1983 said:

 

No sir - this +/-2 tier only benefits top players. Don't try to sell this as something that helps bad players or even the average player. The average player will get a lot of the games undertiered, and it will be a very unfun/frustrating experience for him/her, because while still decent, doesn't have enough to compensate for the difference in tiers. I'm talking about most of the player base here. And frankly there were some state running around this thread that showed that more than 33% of the games (was it 39%?)for T5/T6 were MM with +2 Tier ships.

 

If benefits top players because even in the worst case scenario, if they get undertiered - the other team has a low chance of getting a similarly skilled player in the T5/T6 spots (given that top players, by the very definition, are rate right?). So - even if undertiered, they will compensate for with their skills (which is perfectly fine, and nobody's complaining about that, not me at least - that's the point of the game).

 

 

 

as for 

Why define a new one when you already have the ship tier system. Yeah, not perfect, but since when you're concerned about the differences between ships tiered the same when you seem to have no issue with having huge differences between ships two tiers apart? And why wouldn't it work well in random?

Good players would always be better in same Tier MM. Look at Ranked. The differences between skill levels get more pronounced.

 

Tiers are not used as skill "brackets". Would be nice if players chose their ships based on that, but they do not.

 

4 hours ago, ACe_1983 said:

I don't get it. The player distribution should have less players the more you go up in tier.

Why? The game is 5 years old. Most active players have Tier X ships. Too many players are under the wrong impression that being top Tier makes the game easier for them and go for Tier X. Most battles are played there.

 

New players get to Tier X in 600 to 800 battles.

Experienced players can bring a new F2P account to Tier X in 300 battles (was recently tested).

 

The game offers options to shorten that duration with money.

You can get to Tier IX with 0 battles.

During Christmas you could get to Tier X with only a few battles. Unlock the access to special events, pull out your credit card and 200€ later you had a Tier X.