WOWS matchmaking finally is the same as WoT matchmaking...

[KhorneFlake]

On 11/17/2022 at 12:41 AM, Kutfroat said:

...which sole and only purpose is to try to frustrate players to the point where they start to spend money to progress faster. WG admitted back in WoT that they are doing this, even patented it. But just like in WoT they reached the point where intelligent players realize this and will leave. Because there is no way that players that allways have been way above 50% WR suddenly, in the course of some patches - despite regular play, have become below 40% WR players.

 

Keep all your "it´s random and will average out over the course of 100000 battles BS" to yourself...if seasoned players, with thousands of games played, over the course of a couple of patches "suddenly" become below 40% WR players, no matter what they do, because they e.g. more often than not spawn on the weak, losing flank - because of asymetrical spawns that no one asked for, and never were anounced, but are suddenly in the game...than it has nothing to do with random distribution and statistics. It is set-up matchmaking to maximazine income. It´s about "frustrating" players to the edge they dont leave but start spending". Its a thin red line and of course WG aims for maximum players spending, but in that process they will lose the "thinking man´s action game" playerbase, because these players arent stupid enough to fall for this BS.

 

So, good bye WOWS. Premium time will run out from now on, just like in WoT. And the reason is the same...BS matchmaking.

Bye

[matia251]

2 hours ago, Seraphice said:

New players require a certain amount of battles before ranked battles is even unlocked - after that is reached it is their choice to play ranked or not.

 

Also, how are things getting worse year after year? What changes have we made that prove this? The battle requirement was not lowered in recent years.
Oh and the new player has a higher chance of ending up in the enemy team than your team, since you are already on your own team.

 

Fair seas captain!
~Sera

Do you even know how many battles are required? Let me inform you...130..do you play this game AT ALL? Do you know what it means to enter ranked in a T10 or even Supership with a couple of hundred battles experience? It means you ruin the entire game for your team or even for the enemy team cause they get disgusted by having to face a human BOT in ranked. Why are you mocking me and insult common sense by supporting this idiotic requirement? Even if this requirement was about having 130 battles minimum in the respective tier ship that ranked battles are taking place it would still be pathetic but AT least it would be better than the current tragedy that is happening in ranked. And it is getting worse every year because of the increasing influx of new players which of course is a good thing for the game but it also increases the presence of ignorant noobs in ranked...by a LOT...if only WG had the balls to face and acknowledge reality instead of hiding behind words everything would be much better..

[LukkaiCH]

Am 17.11.2022 um 00:41, Kutfroat sagte:

...if seasoned players, with thousands of games played, over the course of a couple of patches "suddenly" become below 40% WR players, no matter what they do, because they e.g. more often than not spawn on the weak, losing flank - because of asymetrical spawns that no one asked for, and never were anounced, but are suddenly in the game...

Okay, can someone here explain me how spawning on a flank where the opponent team has an overmatch drives down your winning chance? Not tactical options, not chance of long-term survival. But winning chance?

 

I freely admit that I may not be a tactical or mathematical genius. But in a battle where both sides start with the same amount of ships. If one team has superior numbers and thus an advantage on one flank. It does kind of imply that the other team enjoys the same in one of the other starting positions.

 

Am 17.11.2022 um 10:25, Floofz sagte:

The same matchmaking [edited] is happening in Operations aswell, so its not only PvP related.

Aaand here's where you lost all credibility. How would that even work?

 

Vor 10 Stunden, matia251 sagte:

Do you even know how many battles are required? Let me inform you...130..do you play this game AT ALL? Do you know what it means to enter ranked in a T10 or even Supership with a couple of hundred battles experience? It means you ruin the entire game for your team or even for the enemy team cause they get disgusted by having to face a human BOT in ranked. Why are you mocking me and insult common sense by supporting this idiotic requirement? Even if this requirement was about having 130 battles minimum in the respective tier ship that ranked battles are taking place it would still be pathetic but AT least it would be better than the current tragedy that is happening in ranked. And it is getting worse every year because of the increasing influx of new players which of course is a good thing for the game but it also increases the presence of ignorant noobs in ranked...by a LOT...if only WG had the balls to face and acknowledge reality instead of hiding behind words everything would be much better..

130 battles will usually not earn you a tier X ship, unless you throw money at the game when one is available for sale directly (Napoli B at the moment for example). They won't earn you a supership, period. For the vast majority, they will actually have played through that tech-tree to get those ships. And the claim that someone with less than 130 battles in the same tier X ship will be worthless in battle... Is rather adventurous, to put it mildly. Particularily with the tier IX he played before usually being very similar to identical in gameplay. And also already facing the worst that the tier X will. These guys will not be old hands. They will still make rookie mistakes. But they should have learned enough to not be utter liabilities. If they are, a thousand more battles in the same ship are not likely to change that much.

But let's say those people are indeed utter potatoes for the lack of experience they have. And thus are having a negative impact on the performance of the team as a whole. Then there's still the fact, that these people will be on both teams. While at least one place on your team will already be filled by an old hand veteran: You. So if anything, a massive influx of that kind of player would actually make things easier for you on average. Because while you are saddled with bad players on your team, there will be even slightly more of them with the enemy. Making sure that the battles in ranked will be decided not as much by the team as a whole, but by the duelling veterans. Increasing their impact on the game and importance to their side.

If you actually consider that a sign of disrespect, then I'm afraid you don't have any idea of what respect actually is.

 

Finally let's not forget one thing about any potatoes you may meet in Gold: These guys were still not given their places for free. They had to put in the work to get there. And even if they managed to do so sailing on other people's coat-tails, that one: Would not be a new thing either and did happen in the past as well. And two: Still means they put in the hours. So why shouldn't they be allowed in? Just because it means that any old hand will now have to prove they actually belong there?

[Floofz]

15 hours ago, LukkaiCH said:

Aaand here's where you lost all credibility. How would that even work?

 

From what Ive seen since the Operation rework, and Ive seen it a lot. Theres no balance in the teams, theyre either all completely clueless or they steamroll the operation. Its just really strange, you never see some really good players and some really bad. Seems similar in ranked too, either all terrible players or all decent/good. Hell Ive even noticed it watching streamers play ranked. One good player, which is usually yourself or the streamer in question and the rest terrible players, not ONE good one. And if youre in the good team theres usually one good player on the enemy team while the rest are terrible.

Obviously I have no evidence for this and Im not even gonna try to prove anything cause itd be impossible. Its just a weird observation Ive made. To me there really seems to be a pattern in how the teams are built up, obvious enough for me to question how random it is. Especially when you compare it to other teambased pvp games.

[LukkaiCH]

Vor 2 Stunden, Floofz sagte:

From what Ive seen since the Operation rework, and Ive seen it a lot. Theres no balance in the teams, theyre either all completely clueless or they steamroll the operation. Its just really strange, you never see some really good players and some really bad.

As an avid Operations player for a long time, I can assure you that both all three of those kinds of teams definitely do exist and in my experience the latter is actually the most common. And that it is nothing new at all and has always been the case. I did notice a difference in when I was playing though. Teams between shortly after dinner time until about midnight on average being a lot better than just before or after, for example.

[ooh_err_missus]

On 11/28/2022 at 1:13 PM, Seraphice said:

The most major changes that were made were changes to submarines in the matchmaker and some small changes to guarantee that you are not constantly bottom tier (maximum 37.5% of battles).

~Sera

I didn't realise that happened (the not bottom tier all the time)..  I have noticed that getting perma-uptiered seemed to have gone away..  which is a very good thing.

[Seraphice]

On 11/28/2022 at 8:01 PM, matia251 said:

Do you even know how many battles are required? Let me inform you...130..do you play this game AT ALL? Do you know what it means to enter ranked in a T10 or even Supership with a couple of hundred battles experience? It means you ruin the entire game for your team or even for the enemy team cause they get disgusted by having to face a human BOT in ranked. Why are you mocking me and insult common sense by supporting this idiotic requirement? Even if this requirement was about having 130 battles minimum in the respective tier ship that ranked battles are taking place it would still be pathetic but AT least it would be better than the current tragedy that is happening in ranked. And it is getting worse every year because of the increasing influx of new players which of course is a good thing for the game but it also increases the presence of ignorant noobs in ranked...by a LOT...if only WG had the balls to face and acknowledge reality instead of hiding behind words everything would be much better..

If there really are so many new inexperienced players at all levels of ranked, then it should be easier to rank out for you, is it not?
You are able to save your star more often in bronze and silver, and have a greater chance for them to end up in the enemy team after all. We have no interest at the moment in further locking out new players from certain battle types - if that ever changes, we'll of course let you know.
I believe that @LukkaiCH did a good job of explaining this point above already in more detail.

 

10 hours ago, ooh_err_missus said:

I didn't realise that happened (the not bottom tier all the time)..  I have noticed that getting perma-uptiered seemed to have gone away..  which is a very good thing.

It was implemented a long while back as 40% and then was changed to 37.5% "more recently" (still several months back).
Important to keep in mind though is that this is per-tier, so you can still end up permanently bottom tier if you play different tiers all day.

 

Fair seas captain!
~Sera

[ReverendFlashback]

I think the spawns suck quite often and lead to failure before the game even started.

 

Like yesterday I had a T8 match where I spawned middle in Gnevny.

Since I was the only dd there I felt like it was my duty to atleast attempt to take B rather then giving it to the other team for free.

 

Guess what showed up as soon as entering the outer border of the cap?

A freaking Lightning.

Like, shouldn't have another T6 dd spawn there to even things out?

Nope.

Lost instantly a little over half of my hp and cap was obviously lost too and the game later on.

 

crap like this doesn't seem fair to me at all and really annoys me.

[Ymustihaveaname]

On 11/28/2022 at 1:24 PM, Herbstnebel1975 said:

I think it's all about the team and your style of playing. People with more than 53 WR are ALL playing in a good team (clan) and playing the most of their battles with nearly OP vessels in a Divsion of 2 or 3 clanmates.

The problem is that logically, any good player will want to be in a clan for the rewards and to become good the best way to learn is probably to join an active clan with a discord playing active divs as learning by yourself is going to be far harder and worse? Not saying I would not like a better MM even if I lost more games blow outs are not fun even if you are winning 7.5% (4.9% solo) more than losing of them.