What's the rationale behind -1 / + 1 match making?

[The_Angry_Admiral]

What's wrong with having the below MM?

 

Tier I and II

 

Tier III and IV

 

Tier V and VI

 

Tier VII and VIII

 

Tier IX and X

 

Is there some reason why we can't have basic tier match making as the two tiers are more balanced against each other? I can understand as a last resort when the numbers are low and there isn't enough players logged in to get a team together but it just doesn't seem necessary. 

 

[Klopirat]

Vor 8 Minuten, The_Angry_Admiral sagte:

What's wrong with having the below MM?

should be obvious...Tier V always low tier, tier VII always low tier, tier IX always low tier...

 

(and no, the current tier spread isn't an issue...)

[The_Angry_Admiral]

7 minutes ago, Klopirat said:

should be obvious...Tier V always low tier, tier VII always low tier, tier IX always low tier...

 

(and no, the current tier spread isn't an issue for me...)

Why isn't it a problem?

[ColonelPete]

37 minutes ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

Why isn't it a problem?

Some people can play their ships.

[The_Angry_Admiral]

2 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

Some people can play their ships.

So in other words you don't the first clue as to why.

[Bear__Necessities]

Because two difference isn't that big a deal from T5 and up. 

[tocqueville8]

Just now, Klopirat said:

should be obvious...Tier V always low tier, tier VII always low tier, tier IX always low tier...

 

And CVs would always be top tier!

 

He really put on his thinking cap this time...

[SV_Kompresor]

It'd be boring otherwise.

[ColonelPete]

8 minutes ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

So in other words you don't the first clue as to why.

I do. That is what I wrote. 

[The_Angry_Admiral]

2 hours ago, tocqueville8 said:

 

And CVs would always be top tier!

 

He really put on his thinking cap this time...

In fairness CV's aren't done properly to begin with. 

 

Edit: So the MM should not be the best just for the sake of CV's?

 

2 hours ago, Bear__Necessities said:

Because two difference isn't that big a deal from T5 and up. 

Depends on what ships you are using. Some premium Tier VII ships would be considered stong while a stock Tier VII vs a Tier IX can have big gaps in balance. 

 

At the moment why not include Tier VII in ranked along with VIII and IX?

[JohnMac79]

I do actually kind of agree, as long as they are next to each other, meaning T8 would only end up in T9 or T7 games, not T6 or T10.

[Sunleader]

1 hour ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

What's wrong with having the below MM?

 

Tier I and II

 

Tier III and IV

 

Tier V and VI

 

Tier VII and VIII

 

Tier IX and X

 

Is there some reason why we can't have basic tier match making as the two tiers are more balanced against each other? I can understand as a last resort when the numbers are low and there isn't enough players logged in to get a team together but it just doesn't seem necessary. 

 

 

1.

The MM you Suggest would be Horrible.

 

It would mean that basicly all Ships on Uneven Tiers are useless Fodder that is ALWAYS Bottom Tier and can never be Top Tier.

Thus basicly all these Ships becoming worthless and only something People will Play on their Grind to the Next Even Tier.

Likewise the Even Tiers would always be Guaranteed Top Tier with no Risk whatsoever to ever be Bottom Tier.

 

Furthermore it would Create a Huge Problem for Matchmaking. Because right now a T8 Player for example can go into a Match ranging from T6 to T10. That means the MM has Players from 5 Whole Tiers available to Match him with.

But in your System this is Reduced to 2 Tiers. So you got only 40% of the Players Available for Matchmaking.

And thats before you consider Effects like Uneven Tiers barely being Played anymore. Thus basicly eveyone being T4-6-8-10 and the MM constantly Reeling to somehow find a few People on Uneven Tiers to match them so they can Grind.

 

And then there is also the Problem that this actually makes the Game Incredible Unbalanced.

Right now Ships are Balanced by their Statistics in the current MM with up to 2 Tiers up or down.

But if you force certain Tiers. You end up with a Max Tier Situation.

Meaning that within a short time. You automaticly have a few Guaranteed Best Ships in each Tier.

Basicly you get the same Problem as Clanbattle Seasons. With certain Ships really Strong on their own Tier now being Overpowered because they no longer run the Risk of being Uptiered.

As well as other Fairly Balanced Ships in the General Sense now Suddenly being useless because they are by Default Bottom Tier.

 

Musashi for example. Which was just Auctioned off.

Would be a Complete Piece of Crab in your System.

Because she would always be nothing more than a Nerfed Yamato and would basicly be entirely Worthless.

CVs meanwhile would Love it. Cause they would be Guaranteed to always be Toptier. Making them even more Overpowered.

 

So you would have Longer Waiting Times, Less Variety in Combat, Massive Balancing Issues that need to be Addressed, Half of the Games Ships being made Worthless Trash that nobody wants to Play (Including alot of Premium Ships) and as if that wasnt Horrible enough you would also make it a Super Frustrating Experience to Grind any Uneven Tiered Ship.

 

 

 

2.

The Reasons for the Current System are actually fairly easily Related to that.

 

A.

It allows a Large Variety of Ships to be Played. Because you are not Guaranteed to be Top or Bottom Tier. Thus always having the Chance to be either.

Never Creating an Absolute Best Ship to Take.

 

B.

It makes sure there is always Alot of People available to make Matches. Thus making sure that you dont have to Wait 10 Minutes for a Match to Start.

 

C.

It Allows for Asymetrical Balancing as some Ships may not be very Strong all the time. But also dont become Weak when Uptiered. While other Ships might really Struggle with being Uptiered but absolutely Rule if they are Top Tier etc.

 

D.

The Current Balancing is completely Laid out for this Matchmaking. And any Change to the System would basicly require a Complete Rebalancing of all Ships.

 

 

[tocqueville8]

Just now, The_Angry_Admiral said:

In fairness CV's aren't done properly to begin with. 

 

Edit: So the MM should not be the best just for the sake of CV's?

 

1) It's not "for the sake of CVs", more like "for the detriment" of CVs.

 

2) Your proposed MM would not be "the best". In fact it's clear you haven't thought this through, at all. Something more reasonable would be:

 

Tier 1 ---> no torps, no AP, no citadels, very low hp

Tier 2

Tier 2 & 3

Tier 3

Tier 3 & 4

Tier 4

Tier 4 & 5

Tier 5

Tier 5 & 6

etc.

[The_Angry_Admiral]

1 hour ago, Sunleader said:

 

1.

The MM you Suggest would be Horrible.

 

It would mean that basicly all Ships on Uneven Tiers are useless Fodder that is ALWAYS Bottom Tier.

 

 

What's wrong with uneven ships being bottom tier always? I mean if the difference is always just going to be one tier higher how do you figure you will be cannon fodder? Sure Tier VII's are more likely to be cannon fodder for Tier IX now than they would be in what I suggested. 

 

1 hour ago, tocqueville8 said:

 

1) It's not "for the sake of CVs", more like "for the detriment" of CVs.

 

2) Your proposed MM would not be "the best". In fact it's clear you haven't thought this through, at all. Something more reasonable would be:

 

Tier 1 ---> no torps, no AP, no citadels, very low hp

Tier 2

Tier 2 & 3

Tier 3

Tier 3 & 4

Tier 4

Tier 4 & 5

Tier 5

Tier 5 & 6

etc.

They way they've done CV MM looks like a basic jerry-rig job just to fit them in. I mean you have Tier VIII CV's fighting anything from Tier VI to Tier X. 

 

Don't even get me started on submarines. Your suggestion is fine as well as it gets rid of fighting ships two tiers higher. 

[tocqueville8]

2 minutes ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

Your suggestion is fine as well as it gets rid of fighting ships two tiers higher.  

 

My suggestion is better, because it doesn't punish people with being inevitably bottom tier just for playing an odd-tiered ship.

[The_Angry_Admiral]

2 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

 

My suggestion is better, because it doesn't punish people with being inevitably bottom tier just for playing an odd-tiered ship.

Actually you're right with having same tier matches in between. 

 

And being in a Tier VII ship at a Tier IX game isn't punishment or being in low tier with two CV's?

 

There is already plenty of punishment so I'm not sure why that argument is even used. 

[Sunleader]

17 minutes ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

What's wrong with uneven ships being bottom tier always? I mean if the difference is always just going to be one tier higher how do you figure you will be cannon fodder? Sure Tier VII's are more likely to be cannon fodder for Tier IX now than they would be in what I suggested. 

 

Counterquestion.

 

Why would I ever bother Playing an Uneven Tier Ship in your System ?

Why would I ever Play a Königsberg when Nurnberg is basicly a better Königsberg anyways ?

Why would I ever Play Musashi when I can Play Yamato instead and have only Benefits with not a Single Drawback ?

 

Why would anyone ever bother Playing Ships on Uneven Tiers unless the Grind Forces them to do so ?

 

 

They would become Trash by Matchmaking. Because it means you by Default always Play a Ship that is Guaranteed to be Weaker than what your Enemies bring to the Table.

 

 

And Yes.

Being a T7 in a T9 Match right now means you Play a Weaker Ship that is Handicapped quite a bit.

BUT.

You might just as well Land in a T5-7 Match and be the Strongest Ship in the Match.

 

In your System I would never Play T7 unless I am forced to do it to Grind through a Line.

Because T7 would mean I am always Playing with a Handicap and never have the Chance to be the Top Dog.

 

 

 

 

 

[The_Angry_Admiral]

2 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

 

Counterquestion.

 

Why would I ever bother Playing an Uneven Tier Ship in your System ?

Why would I ever Play a Königsberg when Nurnberg is basicly a better Königsberg anyways ?

Why would I ever Play Musashi when I can Play Yamato instead and have only Benefits with not a Single Drawback ?

 

Why would anyone ever bother Playing Ships on Uneven Tiers unless the Grind Forces them to do so ?

 

 

They would become Trash by Matchmaking. Because it means you by Default always Play a Ship that is Guaranteed to be Weaker than what your Enemies bring to the Table.

 

 

And Yes.

Being a T7 in a T9 Match right now means you Play a Weaker Ship that is Handicapped quite a bit.

BUT.

You might just as well Land in a T5-7 Match and be the Strongest Ship in the Match.

 

In your System I would never Play T7 unless I am forced to do it to Grind through a Line.

Because T7 would mean I am always Playing with a Handicap and never have the Chance to be the Top Dog.

 

 

 

 

 

There could be more same tier games but the max will always be one tier higher than you.

 

Solved.

[tocqueville8]

22 minutes ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

And being in a Tier VII ship at a Tier IX game isn't punishment or being in low tier with two CV's?

 

You can make Tier 7 avoid Tier 9 without relegating them to perpetual bottom-tiers with Tier 8. Just have them fight Tier 6 or nothing but Tier 7 at least some of the times.

[Sunleader]

12 minutes ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

There could be more same tier games but the max will always be one tier higher than you.

 

Solved.

 

It actually does not Solve the Problem.

It Simply mitigates the Problem somewhat by at least not screwing you over Each Time.

But unless you also allow the same for the Even Tiers thus also allowing Uneven Tiers to be Top Tier.

The Problem is not Fixed.

 

 

Thing is.

Even if we completely Scrap your System. And basicly just go back to WGs System but reduce the Range by 1

Thus allowing max 1 Tier Difference between Ships.

 

You have only Solved this Problem.

 

What about all the other Problems you Create ?

 

You Still Increase Waiting Times massively.

You Still Reduce Variety in Battle massively.

You Still need to Completely Rebalance all Ships to Fit the New System.

 

None of these is Solved by your Change :)

[COPlUM]

3 hours ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

What's wrong with having the below MM?

 

Tier I and II

 

Tier III and IV

 

Tier V and VI

 

Tier VII and VIII

 

Tier IX and X

Nobody will ever play T1 T3 T5 T7 and T9? Especially T7, nothing struggles more bottom tier than T7 and you would make them bottom tier 100% of the time
Also carriers would be top tier 100% of the time
This is just what this game needs : Five tiers nobody will ever touch again, T7s face T8s 100% of the time and carriers are top tier 100% of the time. Perfect

[doerhoff_damian]

I like the idea of a +1/-1 Matchmaking and I think it would reult in a more balanced Game because you won´t meet ships that are 2 tiers higher than you.

This is especially important when balancing cvs because wg won´t need to worry if a ship can defend itself against a cv 2 tiers higher or if a cv can attack a ship 2 tiers higher.

This also means no one has an excuse to play badly and then blame the Matchmaker because they are low tier.

Tier 2 fights Tier 2 and 3

Tier 3 fights Tier 2 ,3 and 4

Tier 4 fights Tier 3, 4 and 5

Tier 5 fights Tier 4, 5 and 6

Tier 6 fights Tier 5, 6 and 7

Tier 7 fights Tier 6, 7 and 8

Tier 8 fights Tier 7, 8 and 9

Tier 9 fights Tier 8, 9 and 10

Tier 10 fights Tier 9, 10 and 11

Tier 11 fights Tier 10 and 11

 

[COPlUM]

Just now, doerhoff_damian said:

I like the idea of a +1/-1 Matchmaking and I think it would reult in a more balanced Game because you won´t meet ships that are 2 tiers higher than you.

T8 DD vs T7 DD : I outspot you by 1km, I win.
T8 BB vs T8 BB : I overmatch every pixel of your ship, you can't overmatch a single pixel on my ship, I win.
T7s get turbo smashed by T8s, this wouldn't change. In a T7 is doesn't matter if you're facing T8s or T9s, you get smashed either way.

[Mangrey]

4 hours ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

What's wrong with having the below MM?

 

Tier I and II

 

Tier III and IV

 

Tier V and VI

 

Tier VII and VIII

 

Tier IX and X

 

Is there some reason why we can't have basic tier match making as the two tiers are more balanced against each other? I can understand as a last resort when the numbers are low and there isn't enough players logged in to get a team together but it just doesn't seem necessary. 

 

The ationale behind -1 / + 1 match making?  Its Fun........ Plane and easy nothing els 

[tocqueville8]

1 hour ago, Sunleader said:

What about all the other Problems you Create ?

 

You Still Increase Waiting Times massively.

You Still Reduce Variety in Battle massively.

 

I'm perfectly willing to try this, at least for a while.

 

1) waiting times are often minimal if you don't play in a division, really low tiers or at really late hours. I'd be glad to wait 10 seconds instead of 5, most of the times, to avoid some absolutely uneven fights.

 

2) being 2 tiers down or 2 tiers up certain enemies might add more "variety", but so would trying to eat a spoonful of cinnamon powder every other meal, or bashing my hand with a hammer. I appreciate variety in the things I like, but I wouldn't do things I dislike "because variety".

 

As of now, playing a Colorado against an Iowa is absurdly unbalanced: you just suffer through it in the knowledge that one day it's going to be the other way around. I'm okay with removing both sides of the experience, frankly.