Preferential Matchmaking for Arizona and Warspite Needed

[TheIdesOfMarch93]

Don't get why people here are slagging me off for proposing preferential MM for Warspite/Arizona. I've got no complaints about both ships (though I only own Arizona) and I'm not asking for a buff here. Even in the case of New Mex you only really get to put your worth into the team's effort if you either a) have lots of cover to hide in, b) there's no CV in play, or c) you actually are in a position to support your team who don't just run off with their higher speeds ahead of you whilst you play catch up. 

 

I'm borderline accepting of seeing my New Mex get into T8 matches because if CVs are in play at least I know my AA suite still stands a decent chance. But in matches where no CVs are present it becomes a nightmare to play my New Mex or Arizona because you're so team-dependent. If you end up with a potato team you don't have the speed to relocate and/or kite to try and even the odds out. And when CVs are present when I bring my Arizona out I have to keep praying the enemy CV goes for someone else instead of me, because I know if I'm focused I'm going to go down hard and fast. 

 

But then, this is just my opinion. Meanwhile if I get roflsmacked in my T6 battleships one match too many I'll just bring my Tirpitz out and rip a new hole in every enemy ship I get to see and shoot at. Just as revenge on all the T8s! 

[mtm78]

 and I'm not asking for a buff here. 

 

What do you think giving ships protected MM is?

[RedStorm1]

Being bottom tier in a match requires a different play style than when you are top tier.

This adds variety into the games. In a way, you could even call it "mental training" because your brain practices flexibility.

Of course, it is a bugger when you have a crap ship. Warspite used to be the case during a long period due to some changes they did, But now Warspite, Arizona for sure are no crap ships at tier 8 battles.

Even New Mex can hold reasonably at tier 8 battles as long as you play smart (stay near more important targets so they shoot first at then, not you,  and keep your ship angled well (show no broadsides). 

 

I think, wild guess here, what is p... you off is that experience a disproportionate high number of tier 8 battles in your tier 6 ships. It happens to me, too often and I wish I could experience a more healthy proportion of top/bottom tier battles

[mtm78]

Being bottom tier in a match requires a different play style than when you are top tier.

This adds variety into the games. In a way, you could even call it "mental training" because your brain practices flexibility.

Of course, it is a bugger when you have a crap ship. Warspite used to be the case during a long period due to some changes they did, But now Warspite, Arizona for sure are no crap ships at tier 8 battles.

Even New Mex can hold reasonably at tier 8 battles as long as you play smart (stay near more important targets so they shoot first at then, not you,  and keep your ship angled well (show no broadsides). 

 

I think, wild guess here, what is p... you off is that experience a disproportionate high number of tier 8 battles in your tier 6 ships. It happens to me, too often and I wish I could experience a more healthy proportion of top/bottom tier battles

 

THAT!

 

There is no issue I can see with +-2 MM, it's only about the distribution of the games where you are bottom / mid / top tier. So far, the new MM system seems to be a bit harsh on certain tiers ( but then again, this was always more or less the case, like not playing to much tier 8 late night as you will be drawn into tier X a lot ). WG has the actual numbers, I know we got topics on this and that players are also tracking their own distribution. 

 

I hope people will not confuse issues with battle tier placement distribution over x number of games with the actual battle tiers. If you feel it's basically ok to be -2 but you're getting to many of them, leave your feedback in the new matchmaker feedback thread

 

 

[Odo_Toothless]

Don't get why people here are slagging me off for proposing preferential MM for Warspite/Arizona. I've got no complaints about both ships (though I only own Arizona) and I'm not asking for a buff here.

 

You have 71 k DMG from 65 games on average in Arizona and you want still extra MM to have probably 100 K ? ;-) Sa what can say Atlanta users with average server DMG placing her on par with tier III/IV ? -2 MM at least.

 

One of the best ship of tier VI must have preferential BB, becouse it is P2W ? Sorry - this topic is ridicules.

If in average DMG, some ships have very huge advantage vs others, they should be rather nerfed ASAP then buffed. Don't you think ?

 

EU server average:

 

Name	Nation	Battles	WR ▼	Dmg	XP	K/D	Sh☠	Pl☠	Srv	MBH	TH
Arizona		41,608	57.86%	54,941	1,458	2.5	1.1	0.9	54%	24%	0%
Warspite		522,699	52.56%	43,239	1,246	1.6	0.9	1.4	43%	26%	0%
Fuso		2,437,023	51.81%	45,741	1,038	1.9	0.9	0.8	50%	18%	0%
New Mexico		2,937,545	50.25%	40,317	1,027	1.6	0.8	1.0	48%	22%	0%

[Mucker]

With prem heal the Warspite can take obscene damage. Some have quoted 100k+ hp but I dunno if it's that high. As long as you don't blow up you can heal way more hp than any other BB.

 

Zombie Regeneration Ship 

 

I had a battle where the damage received was like 180% of base HP, so rather close to 100k. However the +20% heal flag was mounted, but thats a must have on Warspite anyway.

[Seikin]

 

I had a battle where the damage received was like 180% of base HP, so rather close to 100k. However the +20% heal flag was mounted, but thats a must have on Warspite anyway.

 

I've taken over 100k damage a few times in my Warspite - That's with prem consumables and the +20% repair flag - but I do try to play aggressively - but with an escape plan. 

 

It just goes to show how much she burns!