Matchmaker Discussion Thread & MM Balance

[159Hunter]

Look, years ago we had +/-3 MM and teams didn't have the same amount of players. And even that was playable.

Sure, +/-1 MM might sound like an easier mode for newer players. It isn't really, as @DFens_666 explained. 

We now see that at tier X. Since the last iteration you get a lot more full tier X battles. Almost all of them roflstomps. Why? The less experienced don't have an edge when fighting all tier X. So they die even faster than before / deal less dmg than before if they survive longer, only to succomb to focused fire way quicker when they eventually end up in the front line. Thus leading to matches that have a set outcome after 4 minutes and all it takes is another 12 to actually kill all / get to a 1000 points.

[DFens_666]

8 hours ago, ACe_1983 said:

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).

 

Armor doesnt really mean much for Cruisers. Fiji has basicly the same armor than Leander, and Edinburgh through Minotaur have slightly better armor, with the T9-10 having Citadels like twice the size of the others.

The biggest difference for Leander/Fiji compared to the T8+ RN CLs, is that they get overmatched by 203mm Cruiser AP (but most people dont know that so eh).

But against BBs, it doesnt mean anything. A T5 BB will be equally devastating than a T8 BB.

However, armor from hightier BBs actually works in favour of Leander: T7-8+ BBs are build more around the all-or-nothing armor scheme, thus their armor is usually very thin, except at the armored belt (which doesnt matter anyway for RN CLs). So you will be able to inflict more damage to them.

Also in regards of RN CLs, your shell damage stays the same till the end. The only thing that changes, is that they get more firepower either by having more barrels or faster reload. 

[Saltface]

@ACe_1983

 

Hi there and welcome to the forum. The place where Knowledge and Skill abound but you really have to dig under the surface to find it.

 

Took me some time to read up .... so let me finish the disclaimer first and get it out of the way:

Disclaimer - I don't argue for or against the +/- 2 MM. I wont say if it is good or it is bad. It is what it is.

It is acceptable so long it applies the same to all players. And it does. We are done with that.

 

However, what I will say is that (+/- 2 MM) should not be a problem. It is playable just fine. You just need to understand how to play when you are top or bottom tier. You need to excuse the guys that told you it is just a L2P issue. They are right. It all comes down to basic game knowledge. I am not talking about advanced knowledge that needs thousands of high tier battles to discover. Just plain basic game knowledge that you should gain during your low tier battles. Alas most players don't have it.

 

My opinion is that MM, be it what it is, is playable for any player that has the basic knowledge of the game.

 

Well, you might feel otherwise. Your feelings are valid. Just as valid as my feelings. But feelings are trumped by facts. Data is hard facts. And I d rather trust data than my feelings (or yours for that matter). Data tells us another story. Data shows that +/-2 MM does not skew the results. Furthermore, number of players on the servers (hard data) tell us that +/- 2 MM is as far as we can go. We don't have the numbers that would allow us to run a different MM. So, as far as I m concerned it is end of story. This is the best MM we can get for now.

 

My advice to you is stop thinking about MM for now. You are allocating resources in a most unproductive way. Concentrate on learning to play. You cant change the MM. But you can be a better player. L2P.

 

The Forum is a gold mine. Or even better, think of it as a diamond mine. You will dig a great deal of filth to get to a small fragment of huge value.

 

Regards

Saltface

 

Tag: @Bear__Necessities

 

P.S. here are the numbers. Have a look for yourself.  http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BLUB__BLUB]

8 hours ago, Saltface said:

You will dig a great deal of filth to get to a small fragment of huge value.

For that one you deserve a huuuge thumbsup. 

[ACe_1983]

On 5/11/2020 at 12:39 PM, Saltface said:

@ACe_1983

 

Hi there and welcome to the forum. The place where Knowledge and Skill abound but you really have to dig under the surface to find it.

 

Took me some time to read up .... so let me finish the disclaimer first and get it out of the way:

Disclaimer - I don't argue for or against the +/- 2 MM. I wont say if it is good or it is bad. It is what it is.

It is acceptable so long it applies the same to all players. And it does. We are done with that.

 

However, what I will say is that (+/- 2 MM) should not be a problem. It is playable just fine. You just need to understand how to play when you are top or bottom tier. You need to excuse the guys that told you it is just a L2P issue. They are right. It all comes down to basic game knowledge. I am not talking about advanced knowledge that needs thousands of high tier battles to discover. Just plain basic game knowledge that you should gain during your low tier battles. Alas most players don't have it.

 

My opinion is that MM, be it what it is, is playable for any player that has the basic knowledge of the game.

 

Well, you might feel otherwise. Your feelings are valid. Just as valid as my feelings. But feelings are trumped by facts. Data is hard facts. And I d rather trust data than my feelings (or yours for that matter). Data tells us another story. Data shows that +/-2 MM does not skew the results. Furthermore, number of players on the servers (hard data) tell us that +/- 2 MM is as far as we can go. We don't have the numbers that would allow us to run a different MM. So, as far as I m concerned it is end of story. This is the best MM we can get for now.

 

My advice to you is stop thinking about MM for now. You are allocating resources in a most unproductive way. Concentrate on learning to play. You cant change the MM. But you can be a better player. L2P.

 

The Forum is a gold mine. Or even better, think of it as a diamond mine. You will dig a great deal of filth to get to a small fragment of huge value.

 

Regards

Saltface

 

Tag: @Bear__Necessities

 

P.S. here are the numbers. Have a look for yourself.  http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/

 

 

 

 

 

 

"However, what I will say is that (+/- 2 MM) should not be a problem." - It is. Maybe it should not be a problem, but it is. It is because it's almost constant undetiering you. So in practice it -2; +/-1 T.

 

"It is playable just fine." - So it's just fine to have people pushed into either being non-commital (passive) or suicidal. Yeah, that's precisely how they will learn.

 

You just need to understand how to play when you are top or bottom tier." - Nice one, considering that out of the last 40 games or so 35 were played as low tier (T5 with T7 or T6 with T8) and about 5 or so as middle tier (T6 in T5 - T7 games). I never was the top tier. But hey, I need to learn how to pew pew as top tier... How will I do that when I am constantly low tier? I mean Ok, given something like 30 - 40 - 30 distribution, it would be ok. But it's not like that. See above how it;s like in practive.

 

In the end I find it absurd to see you guys complaining that T10 is filled with inexperienced players and at the same time defend (with such passion I might say) a mechanism which practically forces the players to take shortcuts - rush to T10. It matters not that they will be frustrated just as well at T10 because more experienced players will own them still, it matters that they perceive this as the only way to get out a frustrating situation - that is being constantly undertiered. And so they go for it. Most players.

 

And you know what? After the last days, I'm really fed up with being cannon fodder. It's not about getting to the T10 ship, but sure as hell I'd like to be given a fair chance to appreciate and enjoy the experience. Having fun means having a fair chance at doing well. Well... thing is that with such a MM, the only way I would have a fair chance is to get a T10 ship ASAP, after passing T4. So you see, I really don't give a rat's... on the MM itself. What I care is that I don't get constantly pushed into playing something that is really no fun, not because the game is bad, but because the people whom have most to win from such a biased system (again, this system benefits most the top dogs), the very people who come up with bs "arguments" on how this is a good thing, are so keen on advocating pro this MM style.

 

But I get it, I mean if you don't convince players like me to just shut up put up with this stupid system, you'd soon run out of lower tiered shooting targets.

 

You seem to like numbers. How come out of 50 games a noob player like myself, with 500 games exp is placed in matches where 90% of the times he is low tier. Inexperienced noob AND low tier. Forced to either wait for the game to be decided already or being blown out of the water in under 2 minutes. What am I supposed to learn from that? You tell me... since you advocate this crappy system is "just fine".

 

You are certainly right in one aspect. I am most definitely wasting time arguing with people who say stuff like "T5 BB is just as devastating as a T8 BB" and then "the only difference is that they have more guns and faster reload". I mean... really trying to sell this [edited] as something else is... wow! And - I completely agree with you, I will check out the numbers. On a first glance, looking at the distributions of T5 players on EU (where I play), it's definetly bad for them. T5 will almost always get placed in matches where they are the lowest tier. But hey, if you say that fine, it must be fine. Especially against 6 (I think 6 is the norm) T7 ships.

 

I am pretty tired of the oxymoron of you guys saying this is fine and at the same time complaining that tier 10 is filled with crap players. So... for the fun of it - i'd like you to imagine playing some 50 or 100 games (in a row) with people just as experienced as you, but you having a T5/T6 and the others having a +2 tiers above you almost always. Now think that you'd play not against your peers, but rather play against (much) better players (yeah, hard for you to grasp, I know, but just try to imagine). Wonder how long you'l last before starting to cry foul. Or rush to tier 10.

 

So yeah, I think I've understood what the community here is like. Definitely not unlike other communities. Most people are... how should I say this... better not engaged into conversation with. This forum is indeed a diamond mine. 99.9% is just mud and sloth, and for that 0.1% you'd better off PM-ing that person. I mean having people saying white is black and black is white, and at the same time "L2P" you, has nothing to do with being a noob or not, it has more to do with common sense, logic and decent communication skills. Or rather the lack of them.

 

Cheers.

[ColonelPete]

31 minutes ago, ACe_1983 said:

... you guys complaining that T10 is filled with inexperienced players and at the same time defend (with such passion I might say) a mechanism which practically forces the players to take shortcuts - rush to T10.

So WG sends goons to their homes and threatens them at gunpoint to rush to Tier X?

Once again: Tier X is not better. People perform worse there. People who rush to Tier X perform MUCH worse there than in mid Tier.

[Captaindanz]

Games are getting shorter and shorter...

[ACe_1983]

18 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

So WG sends goons to their homes and threatens them at gunpoint to rush to Tier X?

Once again: Tier X is not better. People perform worse there. People who rush to Tier X perform MUCH worse there than in mid Tier.

wow, "So WG sends goons to their homes and threatens them at gunpoint to rush to Tier X?" is much better than admitting that yeah, you guys complain how T10 is crap but at the same time cheer for precisely the system that pushes player precisely into coming to T10.

 

"Once again: Tier X is not better. People perform worse there. People who rush to Tier X perform MUCH worse there than in mid Tier." You don't get it, do you. Maybe I'll actually need to draw a diagram.  Most players don't know that. I happen to agree that it might be even worse to get to T10 inexperienced than being stuck and play chow for the benefit of players who get to complain how crap are players are T10 but at the same time love their low tier noob chow.

 

It doesn't matter that you're right or not. It matters that most players perceive it as a salvation point. And they have no real option. So... there we go. Maybe noobs should not complain about the system being unfair, just as "l33ts" should not complain about noobs rushing to T10. Why? Because there's a causal connection. Which you so ungraciously go around it like it's a god damn plague.

 

The point is that most players seem to perceive that the higher the level the "more fair" the system. And that's enough to make them rush. And once there, you guys complain about oh how bad is the game for you because you don't get to play with good players. Oh booo-hoooo. Cry me a river. You will get more and more bad players at T10 as long as the lower "brakets" push them into rushing. It doesn't matter the they're bad, and they'll be worse even more at T10. What matters is that even the average player will feel the same urge to get to T10 ASAP. So, even the T5 average player will get quickly to T10 where he/she will suck. Why? Because he/she skipped all the so-called progression. But what else were he/she to do when all that "progression" is useless anyway, because it promotes either luck-based suicidal headlong charges or passive leech-like play.

 

It's not rocket science.

 

It's just hypocrisy to feint not getting it or coming up with new and improved ways of polishing a turd. It's all right for you to complain about not having fun at T10 because you have to slug fest a bunch of noobs but at the same time shut down any noob that dares to complain of how unfair the system is in lower tiers.

 

Anyway, just for the record, I never said I don't have much to learn. I have a tone to learn. Obviously, teen like crap talk like "L2P" triggers me, but that's just me. I get triggered. Because as always in such communities the "L2P" line plays the role of the universal excuse for anything or anyone challenging a status quo which is objectively biased. That's what is insane - that you get to "L2P" me and at the same time complain about the effects of an insane mechanism and at the same time defend that insane mechanism. Now that's what I call nuts.

[ColonelPete]

9 minutes ago, ACe_1983 said:

Most players don't know that.

That is WHY WE are telling them that!

And to be honest, going through the Tiers, one should figure that out on their own.

 

No option?

Yes, when you do not think about what you are doing, it might seem that way. Interestingly a couple of tenthousand players figured out there are other options.

 

After writing your rant, I hope you finally understand why this "unfairness" is only perceived, but not real.

[DFens_666]

2 hours ago, ACe_1983 said:

What I care is that I don't get constantly pushed into playing something that is really no fun, not because the game is bad, but because the people whom have most to win from such a biased system (again, this system benefits most the top dogs), the very people who come up with bs "arguments" on how this is a good thing, are so keen on advocating pro this MM style.

 

So because people are defending this MM, you dont have fun playing this game...

that must be level 1000 logic, i wonder, what came first, you complaining about MM or we telling you how we see it?

[ACe_1983]

20 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

That is WHY WE are telling them that!

:)))))) No, you're telling them that they shouldn't complain for a BS MM. You have a really shady logic, you're really confused. As I said, having them hitting the ultimate wall at lvl 10 is not excluding the fact that the MM is absolutely bonkers for lower tiers. As a matter of fact it's probably the most important contributing factor of having players getting to T10 not ready.

 

Quote

And to be honest, going through the Tiers, one should figure that out on their own.

This is the only sensible thing you've said so far.

 

Quote

No option?

Yes, when you do not think about what you are doing, it might seem that way. Interestingly a couple of tenthousand players figured out there are other options.

...yes, no option. Your opinion gets trumped by the statistics and all the other people here who have just been throwing the "too many noobs at T10" argument.

 

Oh, I forgot. Of course there's an option... being chow for all those people who just want the "noobs" to learn by either not playing the game of by not caring how fast they die. By players who look at you damage done in a +2 tier match and "lolz" you, because hey tactics and the fact that you need to keep alive 1st and then shoot is fantasy. The same people who... wait for it... 

 

"A T5 BB will be equally devastating than a T8 BB. [...] The only thing that changes, is that they get more firepower either by having more barrels or faster reload. "

 

Now that's one golden piece of advice!!!

 

Quote

After writing your rant, I hope you finally understand why this "unfairness" is only perceived, but not real.

You still don't get it. The unfairness is real when it comes to MM for lower tiers. What is perceived is the "more fair" part by rushing to higher levels. Where indeed, the leveled playing field is finally guaranteed (T10 ships) but... players lose sight of the fact that by rushing they will get there without the necessary skills. So they suck at it, maybe even worse than they did by playing "fun" games where they get shot at by people whom you can't possibly even reach before they sink you or where they just sit it out until it's over before you fire your 10th shot.

 

So basically you're damned to stay in a place where you're forced to face better players with better ships, constantly - as in a regular basis - as in more games where you get to play against higher tier ships -  (because you also seem to ignore this part...) or damned if you rush it.

 

What most players don't know is the second part. They have a distorted image about getting to T10 early on. This is based on what you say and on those interesting numbers. The first part is absolutely real - nobody finds it fun to get absolutely owned over and over have absolutely boring games over and over. The second part is caused by the first part. You just seem to ignore the part which you don't like or distort them to seem like you have a point.

 

So you see, as much as you try to paint it otherwise, you just want to have your cake and eat it too. You'd like to have players progress naturally (declarative at least) so that only those "deserving" get to the "l33t" status (which is understandable) but at the same time you oppose "l33t" having to actually do battle mostly with "l33t"s, "noobs" with "noobs" and those in between with those in between. Which in the end would ensure a healthy distribution of skilled players towards the top, and less skilled players towards the bottom. Natural. You advocate a system that doesn't teach player how to actually play the game but throw the universal-counter-argument "L2P". You advocate a system where those lower tier players are pushed into facing higher tier ships, again, on a regular basis but don't mind getting to call that "learning".

 

Being blind to the consequences of the biased MM system doesn't make you right, just hypocritical when you complain about the effects while ignoring the cause (or simply twisting other people's words just to make the fit your narrative).

[ACe_1983]

On 5/11/2020 at 10:49 PM, DFens_666 said:

 

So because people are defending this MM, you dont have fun playing this game...

that must be level 1000 logic, i wonder, what came first, you complaining about MM or we telling you how we see it?

no sir, you don't get to talk about logic. especially when you twist the things i'm saying. 

 

*edit*

 

Quote

A T5 BB will be equally devastating than a T8 BB. [...] The only thing that changes, is that they get more firepower either by having more barrels or faster reload.

[DFens_666]

On 5/11/2020 at 10:51 PM, ACe_1983 said:

"A T5 BB will be equally devastating than a T8 BB. [...] The only thing that changes, is that they get more firepower either by having more barrels or faster reload. "

 

Now that's one golden piece of advice!!!

 

How about you stop putting quotes together and not put words into other peopls mouths?

The first part is about BBs, the latter is about RN CLs.

Fuso T6 IJN BB: 261936 DPM

Amagi T8 IJN BB: 252000 DPM

 

*edit* Fuso has more guns and faster reload than the Amagi, and if you are leander, neither of those has issues overmatching most of your armor. Even worse, Fuso has better armor which makes it harder for you to fight it

But keep blaming the game, that will help you down the road to T10. But hey, maybe we get another one to complain about when we are mowing through the hords of noobs as you are putting it yourself

[ColonelPete]

28 minutes ago, ACe_1983 said:

:)))))) No, you're telling them that they shouldn't complain for a BS MM.

No, we do not, as explained. Read the whole thread if you like.

 

What statistics say there is no other option?

It should be obvious that you can play other classes and lines to improve your understanding of the game or go back in Tier and practice with a ship you like.

 

 The playing field is not level on Tier X, to the contrary. Your understanding of fairness is very selective.

 

And be more careful with your speculations about other people. You are entering lala land.

Contrary to you, I explain to people how this game works, what to consider with each class and how to improve.

[Saltface]

@ACe_1983

 

Given the number of players in the game  -/+2 MM is the best we can have. We don't have enough players to have reasonable waiting times with -/+1 MM.

Having told you that and my disclaimer should have saved you from typing a wall of text to vent your frustration about the MM. 

You know what?  If you want to argue about something we cannot change ..... do it alone.

 

1 hour ago, ACe_1983 said:

It's not rocket science.

No its not rocket science. Its a game. You still need to L2P. Because you don't know how to play. And it is obvious that you don't if cant understand that a T5 BB can Dev Strike a T7 cruiser.

 

1 hour ago, ACe_1983 said:

anyone challenging a status quo which is objectively biased

is it? according to whom? You? What are the objective criteria? What metrics did you use in order to have the illumination of you discovery?

 

 

[GarrusBrutus]

@ACe_1983

Yes, you've convinced me. Mm is indeed unfair to you. Now you just have to convince wargaming to change their MM model that has been successful (according to them and according to the ever-growing number of active players) for almost 6 years now. Good luck! 

 

 

On 5/11/2020 at 9:34 PM, ACe_1983 said:

What I care is that I don't get constantly pushed into playing something that is really no fun, not because the game is bad, but because the people whom have most to win from such a biased system (again, this system benefits most the top dogs), the very people who come up with bs "arguments" on how this is a good thing, are so keen on advocating pro this MM style.

 

But I get it, I mean if you don't convince players like me to just shut up put up with this stupid system, you'd soon run out of lower tiered shooting targets.

The people who have most to win from such a system? Mate, no offense again but this is some next level tinfoil hat conspiracy theory bullish!t. 

 

First, you think players have ANY power over how "the system" works? No, they don't. 

Second, assuming those "top dogs" (I assume you mean those you're arguing with right now in this thread) gain nothing with having unexperienced players two tiers lower matched with and/or against them. Because it creates the thing we all hate: rofl stomps. Those are bad for xp/credit gains and bad for your stats. 

Third, maybe listen to players who have a combined gamecount over one hundred thousand games and who have been playing for years instead of accusing them of supporting a broken system (that they somehow survived, grew and thrived in). 

Fourth, a few years ago you could end up in a match where you would be a tier 6 bb against tier 10 ships and your team had no DDs while the enemy had three. MM got a whole lot better of the years so fighting ships two tiers higher isn't such a big deal as you make it out to be. Trust me, it was way worse. 

Fifth, if you would just change your attitude from "this is unfair and there is nothing that I can do about it, so let me voice out my anger and frustration to those who can't do anything about it anyway" to "Hey this is more challenging than I first expected, maybe if I ask the help of veterans of the game I could get better at this quicker and have more fun sooner". 

You CAN do well against ships two tiers higher. It requires you to actually be willing to learn and soak up some game knowledge. [edited]

[ACe_1983]

On 5/11/2020 at 11:02 PM, DFens_666 said:

 

How about you stop putting quotes together and not put words into other peopls mouths?

The first part is about BBs, the latter is about RN CLs.

Fuso T6 IJN BB: 261936 DPM

Amagi T8 IJN BB: 252000 DPM

 

*edit* Fuso has more guns and faster reload than the Amagi, and if you are leander, neither of those has issues overmatching most of your armor. Even worse, Fuso has better armor which makes it harder for you to fight it

But keep blaming the game, that will help you down the road to T10. But hey, maybe we get another one to complain about when we are mowing through the hords of noobs as you are putting it yourself

*edit*

 

Quote

Fuso T6 IJN BB: 261936 DPM

Amagi T8 IJN BB: 252000 DPM

 

*edit*

 

So... Let's look at some other numbers:

 

Fuso: 356mm guns, 227m dispersion, 775/805 m/s, 25% Fire Chance, Range 19.8 KM, Max speed: 21.6 kn, Citadel 26 mm+ (and those 26 mm are on the sides...)

Amagi: 410mm gun, 214m dispersion, 806/805 m/s, 30% Fire Chance, Range 18.1 km, Max speed 28.1 kn, Citadel 70 mm+ all of it sloped.

 

And I'm not even going to talk about gun placement, ballistics, secondaries, AA, ruder shift time etc etc etc. And I bet that Amagi can rip Fuso to shreds while the other way around is not that likely.

 

So I'll be damned if Amagi isn't just... overall better. There's is only one thing I might be missing, I admit - you saying that Fuso has better armor. How come? Otherwise, the only downside is the smaller range, but maan does it compensate in terms of, well, everything else.

 

Ok, so let's go through some things here and do correct me if I got them wrong.

 

1. You picking a specific example and centering it on DPM only is not representative of the general picture. Even if just because most of the times DPM comparison will make T6 way under powered when compared to a T8. Generally. So you picked that one example (maybe there's a couple more, doesn't even matter) that oppose the general trend.

 

2. This is a game where the tactical advantage is "the" thing. Or at least this is my impression from watching all those hours of youtube clips on this. Or reading some of the more sane stuff on the forums. And T8 in general allow you a much greater tactical advantage. As a T6 DD, when the CV invariably spots you while you shoot your spit range T6 pea shooter at the incoming planes, having other T6 going against you means you get shot at by 2, 3 ships. So you have to deal with evading the rockets and some enemy fire. On the other hand, going against T8s means that they more often than not have a better range to engage you. So you're getting shot at not by 3, but by 5 other ships. Ships that generally speaking have better firepower (even if less guns, or slower reload, generally speaking much harder hitting - HE because we're talking DDs, right?). Which in turn means that there a hell of a lot more chances you get nailed (or even nicked) and maybe set on fire. Also, the damage per shot is generally higher as you go up in tier, so for a DD that's really bad news since there's a higher chance for you not only to get nailed but get nailed harder.

 

Now, let's assume I'm a BB. T6 BB. Hmm... so I immediately notice that T8 BBs can shoot me without me being able to shoot back. Or if I can shoot back, I do waaay less damage they they do on me. Generally they can inflict a heck of a lot more damage than I do or they can tank a hell of a lot more damage than I do or both of those at the same time. Or, if they have a range advantage, they can just kite the hell out of me. Or they have much better speed. Or they can simply citadel my [edited]while I simply can't (because of the armor). Nowhere for me to run. Island camping? Ok, but since the battle is taking place at ranges I can't reach, or I'm not effective anyway, how much good would that do to the team? I'll just sit there waiting for something to come in range and praying that by the time this happens the game is not lost already. Otherwise, If I want to actually play the game, I am forced to get closer to the enemy. Not saying that island camping is not a way to play the game, but in this particular situation this is counterproductive because all you get to do is sit and take pot shots at enemy DDs or the stupid CA that broadsides you. Or.. I decide to go closer. And on my way to that I'll get again shot at by ships I cannot shoot back to.

 

As a CA... +2T DDs may still fear me but now they fight back. Harder. Their torps may have longer range, and bigger damage, or may be faster. They might shoot more accurately, faster, harder hitting. Again, it doesn't have to be one thing which is OP, but multiplying multiple otherwise small advantages snowballs into a huge advantage.

 

So yeah. Objectively speaking (to answer @Saltface too) T8 have a big advantage over T6, by having a better and more extensive toolkit, by having multiple things which they are simply better at (longer range or better guns or faster or better armor whatever + better or more upgrades etc.), which translates into a huge tactical advantage. Same for T7 vs T5. T7 has a clear advantage over T5 not necessarily because of one sheer raw number, but because of the combination of multiple factors. The force multiplier, skewed heavily to the higher tier side, is what turns this into a nightmare for the low tier.

 

So yeah, provide me my first real lesson. Tell me how T6 vs T8 is "better" just because DPM and why ignoring the rest of the factors which added up, little by little, one by one, snowball into a huge tactical advantage, is a valid point of view.

 

So yeah, I need to learn how to play. Yeah - there are game modes that I haven't accounted for (but would still not be affected negatively with a +/-1 range instead of the +/-2). Yeah, the wait times would be longer (now much longer? anyone care to give an estimate?) and of course - money. But this last one only supports the idea that this is designed to be overly difficult, otherwise people would not feel the incentive to spend to advance quicker.

 

So if you're going to bring something to the table, at least don't do the "better DPM = better ship" thing. 'Cause, just like in many other games, it's not just about the damage.

[ACe_1983]

On 5/12/2020 at 1:06 AM, GarrusBrutus said:

@ACe_1983

Yes, you've convinced me. Mm is indeed unfair to you. Now you just have to convince wargaming to change their MM model that has been successful (according to them and according to the ever-growing number of active players) for almost 6 years now. Good luck! 

 

 

The people who have most to win from such a system? Mate, no offense again but this is some next level tinfoil hat conspiracy theory bullish!t. 

 

First, you think players have ANY power over how "the system" works? No, they don't. 

Second, assuming those "top dogs" (I assume you mean those you're arguing with right now in this thread) gain nothing with having unexperienced players two tiers lower matched with and/or against them. Because it creates the thing we all hate: rofl stomps. Those are bad for xp/credit gains and bad for your stats. 

Third, maybe listen to players who have a combined gamecount over one hundred thousand games and who have been playing for years instead of accusing them of supporting a broken system (that they somehow survived, grew and thrived in). 

Fourth, a few years ago you could end up in a match where you would be a tier 6 bb against tier 10 ships and your team had no DDs while the enemy had three. MM got a whole lot better of the years so fighting ships two tiers higher isn't such a big deal as you make it out to be. Trust me, it was way worse. 

Fifth, if you would just change your attitude from "this is unfair and there is nothing that I can do about it, so let me voice out my anger and frustration to those who can't do anything about it anyway" to "Hey this is more challenging than I first expected, maybe if I ask the help of veterans of the game I could get better at this quicker and have more fun sooner". 

You CAN do well against ships two tiers higher. It requires you to actually be willing to learn and soak up some game knowledge. [edited]

Look - the MM system was way worse, I get it. That doesn't make it good now. Just less of a disaster. I'm definitely not trying to conspiracy theory here, but having a look through all those pages on this thread, there's a clear pattern. noobs complain about this MM introducing a very steep curve (one which a lot of people bypass) and, incredibly, the one segment of the player base who is less affected, or in some cases actually advantaged by the system is pounding all the noobs into submission with things ranging from "L2P" to T6 better than T8 because look at this DPM here. And, at the same time, the experienced players complain about, to quote you personally "rofl stomps".

 

Now, for one, being on the winnign side of a rofl stomp is certainly less frustrating than being on the loosing side - we can agree to that I hope.

 

And secondly, What I'm trying to say to you guys, is that this is the effect of precisely having this sudden wall put in front of the "natural" progression of players - which means that most will try to skip it because of a perceive benefit of reaching higher tiers. And it doesn't matter that its's not real (the benefit), and I agree that it may even be worse, what matters is that the MM system itself is pushing people who don't know better into advancing too quickly (because of the frustration of getting the majority of the games rofl stomped on at a lower level).

 

I also get that I need to learn a lot about the game - but coming at me with bs "arguments" of DPM T6 > DPM T8 so rolf omg you noob (which, and I really think I'm not wrong here, is irrelevant) is just that, bs.

 

Anyway, so concretely, how is an average player supposed to play and get some playtime (so that I can actually learn something) in such matches? Because the two strategies that seem to be the only ones viable, are crap (afk until almost done or play active and get deleted fast). What is the alternative to that, other than skipping this altogether and just tiering up? And at some point I'll learn how to play, but at least I'm getting beaten just because of my lack of skills (and that I can deal with, and I can improve on), not because my ship is inferior in so many ways to the enemy's.

 

In the end, the only way to see exactly how good (or more likely hopelessly bad) I am is to get to tier 10. This way there's no "blaming" the ship anymore, so yeah - I can start learning.

 

That's the mindset I'm trying to point towards - the mindset generated by the frustration of being a T6 in a match where half the ships (yours and the enemy's) are T8. And then another match just like the last one. And then yet another one. And at the end of the day you realize that actually most of the games were like that...

[gabberworld]

 current issue is not in +/- 2 MM by self but at there when mm decide that you will end in total potato team.

[gabberworld]

i have suggestion for beginner protection .

users who not researched first the all tier 5 ships, not able research the tier 6 and higher ships.

this rule breaks if user decide buy premium ship higher than tier 5 or have already the tier 6 ship .

 

this way people may actually learn something about the game before they hurry the high tier

 

 

[GarrusBrutus]

On 5/12/2020 at 3:44 AM, ACe_1983 said:

In the end, the only way to see exactly how good (or more likely hopelessly bad) I am is to get to tier 10. This way there's no "blaming" the ship anymore, so yeah - I can start learning.

Just..... read what you write. "get to tier 10 so I can start learning" that is like saying "I don't need to study to be a surgeon, when I get in the operating room for my first brain transplant then I can finally start learning." 

 

->YOU LEARN ALONG THE WAY TO TIER 10.<-

 

These below are your stats. (https://wows-numbers.com/player/569049149,ACe_1983/)

See a pattern emerging? The higher up the tiers you go the harder it gets for you to pull your weight. Because you lack basic game knowledge. Which a player who takes his time learns along the way. But not you, because you have to reach tier 10 first in order to be able to learn. 

 

I wish you good luck in this game because you're going to need it. 

 

[edited]

[Captaindanz]

To the people that need some guidance, watch some youtube videos about positioning, angling, which ammo type to use in certain situations, where to aim at, people are rushing to get to tier 10 and they do not learn any skills during that grind.

[ImTryingButYouDontHelp]

1 hour ago, Captaindanz said:

To the people that need some guidance, watch some youtube videos about positioning, angling, which ammo type to use in certain situations, where to aim at, people are rushing to get to tier 10 and they do not learn any skills during that grind.

They don't even read how far their torps reach, imagine about what you propose.

 

BTW, this is from yesterday afternoon. Enemy team, 4 DDs. My team, 3 DDs. MM didn't wait a lot to make this.

 

 

 

[159Hunter]

No matter what people say, you don't want to believe them. So no point in putting an effort into explaining why you are wrong.

If you think that tier 10 will be where you'll finally start playing on a level playing field... come back to us when you get there.

The MM is taking battles top/middle/bottom tier into account to balance them over time so you aren't always bottom tier. One big caveat: this is calculated per ship and not per session. 

[Captaindanz]

35 minutes ago, Miblogdegolf said:

They don't even read how far their torps reach, imagine about what you propose.

 

BTW, this is from yesterday afternoon. Enemy team, 4 DDs. My team, 3 DDs. MM didn't wait a lot to make this.

 

 

 

Had the same thing yesterday, and yeah, a friendly nicholas almost torped me couple of times when he was trying to torp a bb from 10 km...