Most unbalanced game i have ever player

[Kiagy]

 

I honestly cannot think of any game on the internet as unbalanced as this one

 

Take flint for example:

This ship seriously struggles at T7 with only 11.1 firing range, yes it has smoke but no radar, but Atlanta has radar and no smoke yet has 13.3 firing range

 

Atlanta has 8x2 turrets, yet Flint has only 6x2, this is seriously bad judgement by the developers.

Flint struggles (as i said at T7, yet it is often put into T9 games were is is absolutely useless, its more suited to T6

 

Matchmaking is at the worst level i have seen

 

Take my last ranked match:

 

                                    My Team                                                                                                                                                      Enemy Team

 

            CV Midway 45.5% wr, 38.1% wr with midway                                                                                          CV Richthofen 55.75 wr, 68.42 wr with Richthofen

           Kremlin: Hidden stats                                                                                                                                   Slava 55.26% wr 

           Thunderer: 44.75% wr                                                                                                                                  Daring: 49.30% wr

           Petro: 45,33% wr                                                                                                                                           Petro: 53.55% wr

           Shimakaze: 50.25% wr                                                                                                                                Shimakaze 46.78% wr

            Friesland: 49.5 wr                                                                                                                                         Z-46 51.40% wr 

          Shimakaze: 43.73% wr                                                                                                                                 Thunderer 47.61 wr

 

 

Obviously our CV was totally outclassed, absolutely no clue how to play CV, i do not recall CV dropping fighter cover once

 

 

The game is so unbalanced its actually a big mess

 

[hellhound666]

could you pls point me to where it is said that mm considers WR's of players? ty

[DreamingNCreaming]

It's kinda ironic that you're blaming other players with bad WRs while having your stats hidden.

 

And as already said, WG won't introduce MM depending on the players WR. "It's called random battles for reasons."

[zengaze]

It never does sink in that the ships in this game, are not broken, they do not need fixed, the imbalance is by design and part of the business model. The game is an imbalanced shitfest by design. It drives spending. As for a team having less potatoes in ranked, what rank are you playing at? It is obvious that a low ranks it's going to be a bag of allsorts. At higher ranks, logically you would assume there would be less of a skill gap.

 

So what rank was the game you are talking about at? And why do you have your stats hidden, whilst using others stats in your argument? Do you not see something wrong with that?

[KHETTIFER]

Doesn't matter what the OPs stats are, the MM consistently stacks one team to force outcomes, there's a reason why WGs titles aren't considered skill based PvP games(same reason why their games never make any lists of skill based games), because they aren't.

[Hades_warrior]

47 minutes ago, hellhound666 said:

could you pls point me to where it is said that mm considers WR's of players? ty

It is not but it should be WR based or at least PR. That way we could avoid this shitfest we have every single day in this game.

These days I can't find a single person that have a nice opinion about PvP modes.

[DreamingNCreaming]

Vor 3 Minuten, Hades_warrior sagte:

It is not but it should be WR based or at least PR. That way we could avoid this shitfest we have every single day in this game.

These days I can't find a single person that have a nice opinion about PvP modes.

Sure such a change in the MM would make random games more enjoyable. But WG doesn't support this opinion. And that's why there won't be an more intelligent MM in the future.

[HMS_Kilinowski]

1 hour ago, Mahaaret said:

 

I honestly cannot think of any game on the internet as unbalanced as this one

 

Take flint for example:

This ship seriously struggles at T7 with only 11.1 firing range, yes it has smoke but no radar, but Atlanta has radar and no smoke yet has 13.3 firing range

 

Atlanta has 8x2 turrets, yet Flint has only 6x2, this is seriously bad judgement by the developers.

Flint struggles (as i said at T7, yet it is often put into T9 games were is is absolutely useless, its more suited to T6

 

Matchmaking is at the worst level i have seen

 

Take my last ranked match:

 

[...]

 

Obviously our CV was totally outclassed, absolutely no clue how to play CV, i do not recall CV dropping fighter cover once

 

 

The game is so unbalanced its actually a big mess

 

I looked at the data a couple of months ago. If you account for the average winrate of people who play a certain ship, you can easily calculate which ship is performing better or worse than the average of ships and which ship only appears to be better or worse cause its players are better or worse. Certain ships e.g. are no longer available. They now are played by seasoned players. These players tend to have more experience in the game and play better than new players. That makes ships appear superior, when they are not, or at least not that much as they look on paper.

 

The results I found indicated most ships are within a range of +-2% from the average. I would not call that imbalanced.

There are hundreds of ships in the game now. That their characteristics only account for 2 wins or losses in a hundred games is as balanced as it can get. Trying to decrease the spread would at some point be hysterical.

 

Another point is personal winrates. You complain about the winrates of your team. If matchmaking took winrates into account, winrates would converge towards 50% for all players. Good players would stand the same chance of winning as bad players. What would be the incentive to play well, if you don't get rewarded? The only way would be different leagues with different rewards. Ofc then all the lower league players start whining cause they want the same rewards as the good players, which is why now every bad player can get a steel ship which initially was intended as a reward for competitive players. You gotta make a choice, winrates or leagues?

 

The basic insight for you is, that if you find the game unbalanced, its up to you. Every player can tailor his challenge to his winrate. If I as a player have 38% winrate in my ship, I should move down a few tiers and play a ship that I can perform in at a 50% level. If every player did that, the MM would balance itself. As a human I don't need a balancing mechanism. I can make my own choices. It would seem that your team was full of players who chose a challenge they couldn't handle. With a <48% winrate a player should not be in T10.

 

Which brings us to you.

If you got the results to justify playing at a certain level, you did everything right. You did your part towards a fair challenge and a somewhat balanced match. If you don't, then you are basically complaining about yourself, since you yourself are causing the issue you are complaining about.

 

Edit: Final note. If you think this game is unbalanced, try minding your own business in a lobby full of Oppressor Mk2 as a new player in GTA Online.

[albin322]

1 hour ago, Mahaaret said:

 

 

I honestly cannot think of any game on the internet as unbalanced as this one

 

 

 

so you make a post about people having bad winrate and you hide yours? you know how stupid that is ?

[rage1750]

Just now, albin322 said:

so you make a post about people having bad winrate and you hide yours? you know how stupid that is ?

The dunning kruger effect is strong in this one.

So to answer your question, its unlikely.  

 

 

[hellhound666]

17 minutes ago, Hades_warrior said:

It is not but it should be WR based or at least PR. That way we could avoid this shitfest we have every single day in this game.

These days I can't find a single person that have a nice opinion about PvP modes.

wtf is pr?

go play coop if you cant pvp

[ColonelPete]

And you are still playing it...

[Hades_warrior]

31 minutes ago, hellhound666 said:

wtf is pr?

go play coop if you cant pvp

''This user profile is private.''

I understand.

And for someone who is long time here you should know what is PR.
And if you haven't notice more and more players runing from PvP to Co op. But that goes for smart players of course.

[Hugh_Ruka]

So you were in the Kremlin ....

[Dragontrn]

54 minutes ago, Hugh_Ruka said:

So you were in the Kremlin ....

definitely yea

[Lootboxer]

2 hours ago, Hades_warrior said:

It is not but it should be WR based or at least PR. That way we could avoid this shitfest we have every single day in this game.

Why should better players be punished for being good and poor rewarded for being potatoes?

[DFens_666]

1 hour ago, Hugh_Ruka said:

So you were in the Kremlin ....

 

I think he could have just wrote the WR for all ships, since we would not be able to determine who he is. But i guess he didnt do it because there was only 1 player with >50% WR on his team lol...

[SV_Kompresor]

35 minutes ago, DariusJacek said:

Why should better players be punished for being good and poor rewarded for being potatoes?

There's no need to put worse players on the team to balance good players, just put a similar amount of good and bad players on both teams.

[Lootboxer]

2 minutes ago, SV_Kompresor said:

There's no need to put worse players on the team to balance good players, just put the same amount of good and bad players on both teams.

And how would you determined which are good and bad with this system as after while all would be 50% wr?

[KillStealBoss]

7 minutes ago, DariusJacek said:

And how would you determined which are good and bad with this system as after while all would be 50% wr?

Personal rating would good enough.

[SV_Kompresor]

27 minutes ago, DariusJacek said:

And how would you determined which are good and bad with this system as after while all would be 50% wr?

1. They wouldn't be, because better players would still outplay slightly worse ones.
2. There are more metrics to determine how good players are.

Also having matches where one team has a much much much higher chance of wining (to the point of it being almost pointless to play) is somehow balanced?

Please tell me what's the point for the enemy team to even play this match:

Spoiler

 

The difference between a good and a bad player is that a good player can overcome obstacles much more often and therefore win more. You people keep saying that statistically players get put on each of these onesided teams equally, which would mean that they have next to no effect on end winrate. Ie. they're pointless and should not happen.

 

[hellhound666]

1 hour ago, Hades_warrior said:

''This user profile is private.''

I understand.

And for someone who is long time here you should know what is PR.
And if you haven't notice more and more players runing from PvP to Co op. But that goes for smart players of course.

as stated multiple times pr is flawed - 10k dmg on bb and dd has a different meaning

[DFens_666]

14 minutes ago, SV_Kompresor said:

just put the same amount of good and bad players on both teams.

 

And you really believe there are enough good players to match each other at all times? Usually this is even more tricky because they tend to come in 3x divs. So if you eventually get them, what happens if one div is playing Midway/Stalingrad/whatever BB, and the other Div is playing Massa/Cossack/Kutuzov. Steamroll win for the TX div, because the T8 side has 3x potato in TX ships instead, and TX ships will just steamroll over the T8 div.

[ollonborre]

2 minutes ago, hellhound666 said:

as stated multiple times pr is flawed - 10k dmg on bb and dd has a different meaning

One is many more times easier to pull of than the other and is rewarded accordingly. Would not really call that flawed.

[SV_Kompresor]

3 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

And you really believe there are enough good players to match each other at all times? Usually this is even more tricky because they tend to come in 3x divs. So if you eventually get them, what happens if one div is playing Midway/Stalingrad/whatever BB, and the other Div is playing Massa/Cossack/Kutuzov. Steamroll win for the TX div, because the T8 side has 3x potato in TX ships instead, and TX ships will just steamroll over the T8 div.

At all times? Unlikely, but it should be possible a lot of the time. Of course if you have a triple superunicum div, it'll be difficult, but even a 52% wr player is much better than a 48%. I consider all players that managed to reach at least 52 as good (simply because they usually don't collapse within 3 minutes) and they aren't too terribly uncommon.