Matchmaker Discussion Thread & MM Balance

[RoyaleFlush]

Il y a 2 minutes, ForlornSailor a dit :

 

Then how come, your worst performance is with T10 ships, when you, according to yourself, have the biggest advantage?

 

And just for the record: with your "especially T8 vs T10" you are wrong. very wrong.

Wtf is going wrong with you?

I am telling that T8 ships are too squishy to compete vs most of T10 (battle ship/cruiser), if that ain't clear enough for you just don't bully at me aight?

 

PS: google what is 'ricochet', might be helpful to understand my posts.

 

[ColonelPete]

2 minutes ago, RoyaleFlush said:

Wtf is going wrong with you?

I am telling that T8 ships are too squishy to compete vs most of T10 (battle ship/cruiser), if that ain't clear enough for you just don't bully at me aight?

 

PS: google what is 'ricochet', might be helpful to understand my posts.

Other players do not have your problems...

 

And yes, when your Tier X ships perform worse than your Tier VIII ships, than +2MM is not your problem....

[RoyaleFlush]

Il y a 1 minute, ColonelPete a dit :

Other players do not have your problems...

 

And yes, when your Tier X ships perform worse than your Tier VIII ships, than +2MM is not your problem....

How dare you talking for other players ? Don't be stupid.

Can't talk with ignorant sorry man, it is just too late for your education it seems. Good day tho.

[ColonelPete]

3 minutes ago, RoyaleFlush said:

How dare you talking for other players ? Don't be stupid.

Because I talked with them and know what problems they have and which not...

 

I suggest you do that too. Maybe you learn something about the game.

[RoyaleFlush]

Il y a 1 minute, ColonelPete a dit :

Because I talked with them and know what problems they have and which not...

 

I suggest you do that too. Maybe you learn something about the game.

LOL

 

I hope one day you'll fall off the little cloud from where you're taking everything I am saying from above.

 

Now move one please, I don't wanna discuss with you anymore.

[ForlornSailor]

17 minutes ago, RoyaleFlush said:

I am telling that T8 ships are too squishy to compete vs most of T10 (battle ship/cruiser), if that ain't clear enough for you just don't bully at me aight?

 

PS: google what is 'ricochet', might be helpful to understand my posts.

 

The real problem is this: You are telling other people here, that we dont understand your point, yet from what you write and your stats, its clear as day, that you dont understand key mechanics of the game. So the one, that needs to google anything, is you. Cleveland has the same plating as Worcester, just to give an example. If YOU dont know about ricochet mechanics and how they work, than matchmaking is not your problems - its your lack of of understanding the game. You would fail with a Bourgogne against a Baltimore.

[ColonelPete]

Just now, RoyaleFlush said:

LOL

 

I hope one day you'll fall off the little cloud from where you're taking everything I am saying from above.

 

Now move one please, I don't wanna discuss with you anymore.

It is not my problem that you have diffculty communicating with other people.

[lameoll]

Bye i guess If u dont want to learn annything moving on is your best option i guess 

 

Edited: no personal attacks please

 

[159Hunter]

3 hours ago, RoyaleFlush said:

AP dmg / ships global resistances. (especially T8 vs T10)

Still very vague here. Care to give some specific examples?

3 hours ago, RoyaleFlush said:

Surprised you didn't figured it out by yourself.

Nope, as I don't really struggle in my tier VIII when in tier X matches.

 

Do I have the same influence as a tier X? Nope, I am bottom tier and I lack power (fe. heals in my CA, less HP in my BB, dpm in my DD)  to carry my tier X to victory all by myself.

Does that mean I can't assist them or make plays when presented with an opportunity?

No it doesn't.

What it does mean is that I can collect bigger rewards and the satisfaction of outplaying opponents two tiers higher.

[tocqueville8]

 

This is, I think, the lowest score in any WoWs match I've every played, and I've played plenty at T4.

I barely had time to go for the flank, start tanking some potential damage and generally push the enemy South...and it was over.

 

Seriously, I'm not asking for perfectly equal teams at all times, but this is just ridiculous: take away the victory bonus, and our team did about 3 times as the enemy!

[ColonelPete]

2 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

This is, I think, the lowest score in any WoWs match I've every played, and I've played plenty at T4.

Your Black Swan disagrees.

[tocqueville8]

1 minute ago, ColonelPete said:

Your Black Swan disagrees.

Huh?

[HystericalAccuracy]

1 hour ago, tocqueville8 said:

This is, I think, the lowest score in any WoWs match I've every played

Seeing the scores I wondered why you are posting a co-op battle. Until I realized it´s random 

[tocqueville8]

1 hour ago, VIadoCro said:

Seeing the scores I wondered why you are posting a co-op battle. Until I realized it´s random 

Exactly.

I much prefer losing a nice, somewhat balanced game, than winning like this.

Even the guys who came on top of my team only got about 50-60% of the xp you'd expect for a win at this tier.

[inkedsoulz]

On 4/30/2021 at 1:54 AM, ForlornSailor said:

 

One of the problems (its not the only cause tho) is the matchmaking monitor. There seems to be a growing number of players, that straight out refuse to play, when they see, their team is at a disadvantage. Its kinda insane, because very often, these people are the cause, atleast to a degree, for their team to show up with a lower overall winrate.

 

And quite frankly, I think, tools like mmm and others have a negative impact on the game. They shouldnt exist, they serve no real value. I admit, that I do sometimes check a certain player, especially the CVs in ranked, when I dont trust their names. It makes me chose how to play. And yea, even that is actually wrong.

 

Now as fas as blocking such tools.. I see this as a bit tricky. After all, one could still run the names on a laptop next to him thought wows-numbers, if you REALLY wanted to. There would only be one option: at the start of the game - dont show the names of the players. And I actually think, this might be a good solution... You dont really need that information.

 

MM monitor is usefull, it gives you free information(and free info wins games, since it allows you to change your playstyle accordingly), how experienced is your enemy on the ship they are sailing, are they competent, you can even have a certain idea of their playstyle by their average dmg and kills/per game.

 

Just like some mods that give you info about the hydro/radar range or torp range of certain ships, you load into the game, and u instantly know if enemy shima has 8/12/20 km torps.

 

Yeah, you dont really need that info like mm monitor, but having that info helps a lot since u can change your playstyle accordingly and be more eficient.

[159Hunter]

1 hour ago, inkedsoulz said:

 

MM monitor is usefull, it gives you free information(and free info wins games, since it allows you to change your playstyle accordingly), how experienced is your enemy on the ship they are sailing, are they competent, you can even have a certain idea of their playstyle by their average dmg and kills/per game.

 

Just like some mods that give you info about the hydro/radar range or torp range of certain ships, you load into the game, and u instantly know if enemy shima has 8/12/20 km torps.

 

Yeah, you dont really need that info like mm monitor, but having that info helps a lot since u can change your playstyle accordingly and be more eficient.

with one major restriction: he who uses MMM needs to understand the game and its mechanics.

If said player is a potato he:

a) can't act on the information 

b) will probably only read: teams unfair, game is against me, I will lose.

[GarrusBrutus]

2 hours ago, 159Hunter said:

with one major restriction: he who uses MMM needs to understand the game and its mechanics.

If said player is a potato he:

a) can't act on the information 

b) will probably only read: teams unfair, game is against me, I will lose.

...and if a player already understands the game and its mechanics he doesn need MMM to tell him who is a potato and who isnt, since he will recognise it within the opening stages of the game anyway.

[djole7]

and if a player already understands the game and its mechanics still wg gonna [edited]you so you grind more

The rest is just bla bla bla.

Nobody gets that wg wants you to play as match as posible.

You pay more

they earn more

[ColonelPete]

23 minutes ago, djole7 said:

and if a player already understands the game and its mechanics still wg gonna [edited]you so you grind more

The rest is just bla bla bla.

Nobody gets that wg wants you to play as match as posible.

You pay more

they earn more 

If a game company did not want you to play their games, that would be a bit strange...

[djole7]

53 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

If a game company did not want you to play their games, that would be a bit strange...

now you come to my words.

ITs all about grinding and money earning .

COmpanies dont give a damn about your game play

 

[ColonelPete]

6 minutes ago, djole7 said:

now you come to my words.

ITs all about grinding and money earning .

COmpanies dont give a damn about your game play

If game play is not fun, people do not play.

When people do not play, companies do not earn money.

[djole7]

3 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

If game play is not fun, people do not play.

When people do not play, companies do not earn money.

I like your  way of thinking.

But because a game is  succeded it doesnt meen there are no flaws

[ColonelPete]

2 minutes ago, djole7 said:

I like your  way of thinking.

But because a game is  succeded it doesnt meen there are no flaws

Nobody claimed there are no flaws.

There is probably no game in existence where not at least one person sees a flaw.

[djole7]

Again you personise this.

Is not about one person,its about the balance between fair gameplay 

 

[ColonelPete]

2 minutes ago, djole7 said:

Again you personise this.

Is not about one person,its about the balance between fair gameplay

That is why I wrote "at least" and NOT one person...