Balance Destroyers for goodness sake!

[Blackeon]

So eventually WG get that carriers need balancing

Well wake up WG and balance destroyers

 

WG the developers with years of experience in multiplayer team based games who still can't balance teams

 

Sigh ...... it is pathetic

 

Occasional 3 on one team and 2 on the other but 4 on one team and 2 on the other!!!!

[Myrmix]

Is your problem the matchmaking or the performance of destroyers?

[praetor_jax]

Is your problem the matchmaking or the performance of destroyers?

 

Reading the OP reveals that he wants to even out the numbers of DDs in both teams.

[Admiral_noodle]

Uneven dds ---> not a problem and makes the game varied and interesting.

[Blackeon]

Is your problem the matchmaking or the performance of destroyers?

 

mm is the problem, DDs are fine if balanced in numbers

[Blackeon]

Uneven dds ---> not a problem and makes the game varied and interesting.

I just don't get why people don't want balanced teams? There is more than enough imbalance in the fact that WG refuses or can't balance teams by ability. So at least balance the teams by ship type.

[Lin3]

Blackeon, in your opinion, the team with more Destroyers. Does it have an advantage or a disadvantage when it comes to winning?

[Blackeon]

Blackeon, in your opinion, the team with more Destroyers. Does it have an advantage or a disadvantage when it comes to winning?

 

I guess it might depend on tier, but at lower tiers the team with 4 DD vs 2 has the advantage. But balance the numbers and it doesn't matter.

[Isitari]

Also depends on the number of CV's. 1 CV makes life difficult for DD's, 2 CV's make it almost impossible.

 

Edit: this is for higher tiers mainly. 

[Niibler]

I like the variety, also would like to point out (the obvious), if one team has less DD's than the other it also means it has more CAs or BBs.

[TheJezna]

If the game was balanced it wouldn't matter how many of each class was on a team, alas it is not, and probably never will be as WG explicitly doesn't want it balanced.

[Lin3]

 

I guess it might depend on tier, but at lower tiers the team with 4 DD vs 2 has the advantage. But balance the numbers and it doesn't matter.

 

I play a lot in tier 3 to 5 American cruisers. I'm happy when the enemy team has lots of destroyers. I see it as my job to hunt down any DD's that stick their necks out.

 

In these battles I think my team has a slight advantage if the enemy has more destroyers than us.

[canuckster]

It really depends though on tier, map and battle type. For example a tier 2-3 or 3-4 game on Big Race with the cap in the middle doesn't make a whole lot of difference in a 4-2 imbalance. However, if it's North or Two Brothers with 4 domination caps anywhere from tier 5 to 10, then yeah, it's a huge difference. It's also a huge difference on ranked battles but WG has said they will balance this. Whether or not we see it in randoms is another question.

[CatOnKeyboard]

Uneven dds ---> not a problem and makes the game varied and interesting.

 

Personally I think teams should be mirrored in tier and class once we have enough players to do such a thing. 

[OVanBruce]

I really fail to see the problem here and I atribute OPs ranting to the lack of imagination and experience. DDs will surely cap quickier if there are more on the enemy team but DDs aren't able to hold a cap. Cruisers alreadyhave planes on tier IV (Kuma) and all of then get tje sonar to approach with advantage even an smokescreen. As all of then are agile you can wade through the torp spread of most DDs thanks to the increased spotting distance of the sonar. Once you take the cap you have more chances of holding it because you've got more firepower. And let's not mention any DD that was caught in the cap and killed.

[GeneralHorstPital]

So eventually WG get that carriers need balancing

Well wake up WG and balance destroyers

 

WG the developers with years of experience in multiplayer team based games who still can't balance teams

 

Sigh ...... it is pathetic

 

So, what makes you think that you know better than them with their years of experience ?

 

And I really don´t see a problem here.

Sure, low tier destroyers are (mostly) stronger than high tier ones, but for example, russian and US destroyers on low tiers can´t fire torpedos without being detected. Once detected, even low tier cruisers such as the St. Louis, the Kuma, the Phoenix, etc. are a very big threat to any destroyer. So that leaves the japanese "invisible" destroyers and probably the inability for newer players to dodge torpedos or changing course once in a while. Or the slow tier 3 and 4 battleships...

But that is simply a matter of learn to play. Low tier battleships need escorts as much as on high tiers. On high tiers, it´s mostly because of AA protection, on lower tiers it´s more about fighting destroyers.

If someone goes alone in a Wyoming for example, he is indeed easy prey for an Isokaze, but if he has a Phoenix with him, the Isokaze will probably think twice about it.

[Admiral_noodle]

 

Personally I think teams should be mirrored in tier and class once we have enough players to do such a thing. 

 

If they do that I would probably quit after a while out of boredom. Full mirroring?then you'll want skill based MM and an Olympic event... 

 

Carrier mirroring was brought in because people moaned. In general that's been great for BBs but awful for us CAs. It was actually more fun before... The exact mirror was a change to far. 

 

4 dds vs. 2 in a team? Learn to play! For me in my Murmansk or St. Louis... I love to see lots of dds. I've finally become good at dd shooting thanks to this kind of game. 

 

What about domination? People will ask... Well you know they have more dds, you know where the caps are and you ought to know what the dds will do. Squish them with cruisers by laying traps. 

 

In fact in CBT that was my favourite use of tenryu and Kuma. Follow in the dds and scare the life out of the enemy ones  

 

Maybe there should be "mirror mode" if there were enough people - as a choice. But I'd never chose it. I like some imbalance. Sometimes that imbalance is only perceived and in the end the better TEAM wins not the better collection of ships. 

[fnord_disc]

Teams should be balanced. Perfectly! Not just by tier/ship type, but also by ability and playing style. The matchmaker should clone the player 23 times so they can play against 23 of their own clones.

 

GIVE US FAIR MATCHMAKING WG!

[__Katniss__]

 

I play a lot in tier 3 to 5 American cruisers. I'm happy when the enemy team has lots of destroyers. I see it as my job to hunt down any DD's that stick their necks out.

 

In these battles I think my team has a slight advantage if the enemy has more destroyers than us.

 

Try to be happy when you play vs 3x shimikaze with 20km range torps and your team has tier tier 7 DDs.

[Admiral_noodle]

Teams should be balanced. Perfectly! Not just by tier/ship type, but also by ability and playing style. The matchmaker should clone the player 23 times so they can play against 23 of their own clones.

 

GIVEUSFAIRMATCHMAKINGWG!

 

That would still be unfair somehow. For some. 

 

I feel people complaining about dds not balanced or the MM not perfectly balanced don't want a challenge and are blaming "unfair MM" for losing rather than looking at games as a challenge to be overcome. 

 

Youll get "easy" games as much as the hard. Many times my team have lost the easy ones as well through underestimating the enemy and being to aggressive...

 

and naval warfare didn't have mirror MM. Not even once. I like feeling at least a little like I'm in a naval battle. Mirror everything and I may well go play something else. 

[Hauptbahnhof]

Uneven dds ---> not a problem and makes the game varied and interesting.

 

Uneven CVs ---> not a problem and makes the game varied and interesting.

 

I just don't get why people don't want balanced teams? There is more than enough imbalance in the fact that WG refuses or can't balance teams by ability. So at least balance the teams by ship type.

 

For competitive play or ranks / leagues it's a good idea. For fun.... not so much.

[Spithas]

Uneven dds ---> not a problem and makes the game varied and interesting.

 

Very shortsighted.

 

You can have an uneven number of Cruisers or Battleships but Carriers and Destroyers need to be balanced in numbers and tiers.

[Grimmblut]

You can have an uneven number of Cruisers or Battleships but Carriers and Destroyers need to be balanced in numbers and tiers.

 

I don't agree with you on that one. CVs MUST be equal for both teams in numbers and tiers. It doesn't make any difference however if one team has a DD more and a CA less when the other team has a CA more and a DD less. Furthermore, the value of DDs depends heavily on the fact whether CVs are in the match or not. If two CVs are in each team, DDs become not entirely useless, but they are much less worth to the team than CAs or BBs.

[Crooq_Lionfang]

 

Very shortsighted.

 

You can have an uneven number of Cruisers or Battleships but Carriers and Destroyers need to be balanced in numbers and tiers.

 

You don't. Uneven numbers of destroyers don't imbalance a match overall like uneven numbers/tiers of CVs do. Also, I'm still curious, as it hasn't been answered: does the team with more DDs have an advantage or a disadvantage now?

[Admiral_noodle]

 

Very shortsighted.

 

You can have an uneven number of Cruisers or Battleships but Carriers and Destroyers need to be balanced in numbers and tiers.

 

Very shortsighted? Then you state an opinion without any explanation or evidence  

 

i disagree with your opinion. 

 

Im not even a massive fan of CV mirroring in RANDOM battles. Limited yes but the problem was higher tiers squishing lower tier carriers. I'd have forced tier matching but not always made it equal numbers. My U.S. CAs miss those carrier games. 

 

Please mirror dds in ranked but in random I like variety and challenges. 

 

Also im not convinced having more dds is an advantage. It can be but it depends on the team players so much more.