Fail Division still - T5 in a T8 game - Thought WG stopped it?

[IanH755]

Hi all, I had a game recently where the enemy team had a T5 DD divisioned with a T6 DD which got dragged into a T8 match. I thought WG had stopped "fail" divisions by making it +1 meaning the T6 shouldn't have been in the T8 match i.e. a T7 can bring a T6 (+1 for the division and still +2 for the tier) but a T6 shouldn't be able to bring a T5 into a T8 as it's a +3 gap?

 

Have I got this wrong or has something changed again?

 

 

 

[nikos13ole]

They did 

but that division was dragged in tier 8 cause the highest tier in the division is the ognevoi 

MM looks for the highest tier in the division and then the MM will be +/- 2 according to the highest ship 

having a lower tier ship in the division doesnt changes anything since MM ignores it 

[aboomination]

but a T6 shouldn't be able to bring a T5 into a T8 as it's a +3 gap?

 

Wrong...the division changes just mean that division members cannot be further apart than +-1 tier.

The highest tier division member still determines the maximum tier spread the division might face through regular MM mechanics (+-2). That way my Scharnhorst once got carried into a t10 match by some derpy division leader's mistake 

 

WG doesn't consider the above a fail division.

[Robber_Baron]

I think you got it wrong. The two tiers maximum difference doesn't count for divisions. A division of t6 and t7 can be placed in a t9 battle as well.

[Spellfire40]

The +/-1 means that division members 

 

Wrong...the division changes just mean that division members cannot be further apart than +-1 tier.

The highest tier division member still determines the maximum tier spread the division might face through regular MM mechanics (+-2). That way my Scharnhorst once got carried into a t10 match by some derpy division leader's mistake 

 

WG doesn't consider the above a fail division.

 

​Well if the lower ship would be a cv you still get a Benefit ,-) i think. A T8 BB with a T7 CV would never see T10 Matches because Carrier Mirror MM> normal MM. and wasnt there a +1 MM spread for up to t4?

That would mean a T5 BB in a div  with a T4 CV would be allways top Tir.

[IanH755]

Thanks for the info - I thought it was the end of divisons outside of tier limits (i.e. no T5 in a T8 game) but it seems WG can't even get that right.

[AnotherDuck]

They got it right. Just not the way you wanted it.

[Kenliero]

I just heard funniest thing ever in game.

 

Apparently Cleveland is OK in tier 9 because it was also fighting in WW2

[IanH755]

They got it right. Just not the way you wanted it.

 

No, the idea was to stop people being able to play in tiers which they wouldn't normally be able to due to the +2 MM, so a T1 can't be in a TX match and a T5 can't be in a T8 yet apparently it can in a division, so WG failed.

 

My personal preference means nothing, it's the way WG said they'd stop something considered a negative (too low a tier ship in a higher tier game) but they haven't. It's really not that hard to understand TBH.

[Allied_Winter]

 

No, the idea was to stop people being able to play in tiers which they wouldn't normally be able to due to the +2 MM, so a T1 can't be in a TX match and a T5 can't be in a T8 yet apparently it can in a division, so WG failed.

 

My personal preference means nothing, it's the way WG said they'd stop something considered a negative (too low a tier ship in a higher tier game) but they haven't. It's really not that hard to understand TBH.

 

Then thing is: What is a fail division? Is it your example (so a T5 divs up with a T6 and comes in a T8 match) or is it a T3 Kolberg diving up with a T6 New Mexico getting in a T8 match?

 

I would say only the later is a fail division. 

 

 

Wasn't there a survey, what players would accept? Iirc most players said they were ok that divisions can consist of ships with a maximum one tier difference. So actually WG listened to the community.

 

 

Greetings

[Woofbark]

 

​Well if the lower ship would be a cv you still get a Benefit ,-) i think. A T8 BB with a T7 CV would never see T10 Matches because Carrier Mirror MM> normal MM. and wasnt there a +1 MM spread for up to t4?

That would mean a T5 BB in a div  with a T4 CV would be allways top Tir.

 

I actually had a T6 match where the MM mirror matched two T4 carriers divisioned with other T5 ships, so that doesn't always work.

[IanH755]

Fair enough, I'm obviously wrong and a 3 tier difference is perfectly fine for everyone.

 

In fact, seen as everyone is happy lets make all MM +3, seen as everyone is clearly very happy for it to happen, shall we?

 

For me, anything out of standard MM tier levels is a Fail Division, whether it's a T3 in a TX match or a T5 in a T8 - if it can't happen "normally" then it's wrong. I can't believe people are suggesting that bringing a Phoenix or Svetlana into a T7 game "isn't" a fail, WOW!

[AnotherDuck]

I used to bring my Umikaze into T5 games. That was fun.

 

[Unintentional_submarine]

 

I actually had a T6 match where the MM mirror matched two T4 carriers divisioned with other T5 ships, so that doesn't always work.

 

Ah yes this... Having been the victim of an enemy CV fail division I am less than thrilled of anyone considering gaming the system. They will just take a dump on an unsuspecting enemy player, or potentially (as in my case) an entire enemy division. Thankfully the latter isn't likely to happen due to the more strict MM rules, but it would still be possible (since a 1 tier difference would be possible).

[xXx_Blogis_xXx]

u want it or not , most of time still u face fail div , thats a fact

[YukiEiriKun]

So "I do not understand how the game works so I whine" thread?

That's fine. 3 tier difference was never the issue when talking about the fail divisions. Nor is 3 tier difference an issue in general.

 

*edit*

​And I'm pretty sure that there are many here who have seen, survived and enjoyed +3 tire MM...

 

 

 

 

[Spellfire40]

 

Ah yes this... Having been the victim of an enemy CV fail division I am less than thrilled of anyone considering gaming the system. They will just take a dump on an unsuspecting enemy player, or potentially (as in my case) an entire enemy division. Thankfully the latter isn't likely to happen due to the more strict MM rules, but it would still be possible (since a 1 tier difference would be possible).

Not in that case. You just get because the enemy gambled he would get best posible MM too. Well still can play the system at the cost of your div mates fun factor at any level but 4 you should get max your level plus 1and one of the enemy CVs will have greater problems to get thogh your AA because its undertir.

[Panocek]

Fair enough, I'm obviously wrong and a 3 tier difference is perfectly fine for everyone.

 

In fact, seen as everyone is happy lets make all MM +3, seen as everyone is clearly very happy for it to happen, shall we?

 

For me, anything out of standard MM tier levels is a Fail Division, whether it's a T3 in a TX match or a T5 in a T8 - if it can't happen "normally" then it's wrong. I can't believe people are suggesting that bringing a Phoenix or Svetlana into a T7 game "isn't" a fail, WOW!

 

Tiers in WoWs don't matter as much, especially for destroyers. Umikaze and Minekaze can work just fine even in +4 tiers match. Tirpitz can and will give headache even to tier 10 ships.

 

Ships in this game don't follow up straight up upgrade you might be used to from WoT, here next ship often is sidegrade, if not downgrade.

[Miessa3]

I think it is still rather stupid and would like to see platoons with same MM only.

And WG might consider T5 against T8 "okay", but at the same time they lower the MM at T4 to +1MM..... quiet the contradiction here.

So it's still entirely possible to drag Tier 4 in Tier 7 Matches.

And good luck for your team when has to send a Wyoming to fight Colorados and Nagatos.

[Panocek]

 

And good luck for your team when has to send a Wyoming to fight Colorados and Nagatos.

 

And how that differs from New Orlean or Mogami launched into tier 10 game? Lackluster ship will be lackluster anyway.

[Miessa3]

 

And how that differs from New Orlean or Mogami launched into tier 10 game? Lackluster ship will be lackluster anyway.

 

My point is when they make Tier 4 +1 MM only they have a reason to do so and shouldn't allow a Division of a Tier 4 and a Tier 5 either for the same reason.

[IanH755]

So "I do not understand how the game works so I whine" thread?

 

Wow, the point of this thread has missed you completely hasn't it. There is obviously no point ever asking questions when your man child reaction is to auto default to "waawaa its a whine thread waawaa". If you bothered that single brain cell of yours to actually read (shocking I know) you'd have seen I was a T8 so I was more than happy to kill a lowly T5 on the enemy team, but then you didn't bother to read it did you, shame.

 

 

And how that differs from New Orlean or Mogami launched into tier 10 game? Lackluster ship will be lackluster anyway.

 

Because they are a T8 ship in a TX game, which is what WG "designed" the current MM around, not using a "get around" to bring T7's in to a TX game.

 

Regardless of an individual ships abilities (IJN DD in case) the MM is broken when divisioning allows a ship to play outside of its alloted tiering system

[Allied_Winter]

Regardless of an individual ships abilities (IJN DD in case) the MM is broken when divisioning allows a ship to play outside of its alloted tiering system

 

At that point I can at least see, that we have to raise the question: Is the current method of Div MM good or should it be changed? Should for divisions only count the highest tier (as it currently is, hence the T5 Nicolas in a T8 game).

 

I had a simillar game yesterday in my Mogami. But the Nicolas did quite fine, I and a fellow DD tried to support him at the B cap on Land of Fire and it worked quite well. So it can be enjoyable.

 

And please don't forget: It was the playerbase that gave WG the impression, that a one tier difference Div is "OK"

 

 

Greetings

[Miessa3]

 

At that point I can at least see, that we have to raise the question: Is the current method of Div MM good or should it be changed? Should for divisions only count the highest tier (as it currently is, hence the T5 Nicolas in a T8 game).

 

I had a simillar game yesterday in my Mogami. But the Nicolas did quite fine, I and a fellow DD tried to support him at the B cap on Land of Fire and it worked quite well. So it can be enjoyable.

 

And please don't forget: It was the playerbase that gave WG the impression, that a one tier difference Div is "OK"

 

 

Greetings

 

Overall I am can live with a +1 MM in a platoon when it has to be and the playerbase descided it. I understand WG did this so more friends can play together even though one of them haven't unlocked Tier 8 yet and platoons a Tier 7 with a Tier 8, BUT when i see a Tier 4 in a Tier 7 Match which is PATHETIC i rage about the ignorance of the platoon.

Maybe we should disable that for the first 4 tiers? But its WG we are talking about.... the chance that they actually pull of complicated stuff like this is close to 0.

[Allied_Winter]

Tier 4 in a Tier 7 Match which is PATHETIC i rage about the ignorance of the platoon.

Maybe we should disable that for the first 4 tiers? But its WG we are talking about.... the chance that they actually pull of complicated stuff like this is close to 0.

 

My Isokaze with a 15pt captain begs to differ. Same goes for a Minekaze/Kamikaze/Fujin in a T8 battle. There are some ships that can easily punch above their weight, and then there are shpis like the Wyoming that struggles sometimes against T5s.

 

And while I understand where that frustration about WG is coming from, they are quite quick when it comes to introducing things the players want. And WG != WG. WoT has still the possibilitie of fail platooning, whilst Lesta chose to listen to its playerbase and reducing the div spread.

 

Greetings