One Sided Destroyer Number Advantage

[valoaa]

There are many "imbalances" moaned about, but none of them seem to me as game breaking as this...

 

One team, having more destroyers that the other!!!???

 

This is SUCH a disadvantage to the team with fewer destroyers I's unreal, especially on a map with 4 caps. Yes the team with fewer destroyers will have an extra cruiser but we all know that nowhere near makes up for it... I guess if this is ever addressed it will admit that destroyers simply carry games.

 

I even remember (some time ago now) that this was semi-addressed with a patch where "the maximum difference in the number of destroyers per team is now limited to 1". Still needs to be limited to ZERO please.

 

Please make both teams have an equal amount of destroyers's per game.

 

Thoughts? 

[Dragnorak]

I think the main "imbalance" is how good are your DD's not how many of them have you got.

[Ferry_25]

beautiful women on a bounty island.

[DFens_666]

Has been discussed on the forums lots of times. Some ppl will say it makes no difference, while some say it does. Ive heard WG said, that the team with more DDs doesnt have a higher winrate (but asked for a statement i never got my prove, as id also like to know if they checked for 1 vs 2 DDs and 4 vs 5 DDs seperately or just threw all numbers together)

I think its not necessarily a game decider, but it can be. Sometimes u have matches with 0 vs 1 DD or 1 vs 2 DDs, which i think make a HUGE difference, especially in Domination. Then agian, 4 vs 5 DDs i see the 5 DDs actually in a disadvantage because suddenly the lack of firepower might be noticeable. Thats why id like to know if the numbers were checked seperately.

 

Observe matches where 1 Team has no DD and the other has one. The Team with no DD barely wants to move anywhere coz they got no spotting.

 

At one point i got a lot of matches, where one team had 1 DD and 1 BB more, and the other Team had 2 CAs instead. Those tend to be awful. I opened a thread back then, luckily after that, it seemed to happen less often. Maybe i was unlucky, or who knows if they make little changes to the MM, and check some stuff, who knows.

[Dragnorak]

8 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Has been discussed on the forums lots of times. Some ppl will say it makes no difference, while some say it does. Ive heard WG said, that the team with more DDs doesnt have a higher winrate (but asked for a statement i never got my prove, as id also like to know if they checked for 1 vs 2 DDs and 4 vs 5 DDs seperately or just threw all numbers together)

I think its not necessarily a game decider, but it can be. Sometimes u have matches with 0 vs 1 DD or 1 vs 2 DDs, which i think make a HUGE difference, especially in Domination. Then agian, 4 vs 5 DDs i see the 5 DDs actually in a disadvantage because suddenly the lack of firepower might be noticeable. Thats why id like to know if the numbers were checked seperately.

 

Observe matches where 1 Team has no DD and the other has one. The Team with no DD barely wants to move anywhere coz they got no spotting.

 

At one point i got a lot of matches, where one team had 1 DD and 1 BB more, and the other Team had 2 CAs instead. Those tend to be awful. I opened a thread back then, luckily after that, it seemed to happen less often. Maybe i was unlucky, or who knows if they make little changes to the MM, and check some stuff, who knows.

 

Exactly so many variables.

 

 

[tank276]

1 hour ago, valoaa said:

There are many "imbalances" moaned about, but none of them seem to me as game breaking as this...

 

One team, having more destroyers that the other!!!???

 

This is SUCH a disadvantage to the team with fewer destroyers I's unreal, especially on a map with 4 caps. Yes the team with fewer destroyers will have an extra cruiser but we all know that nowhere near makes up for it... I guess if this is ever addressed it will admit that destroyers simply carry games.

 

I even remember (some time ago now) that this was semi-addressed with a patch where "the maximum difference in the number of destroyers per team is now limited to 1". Still needs to be limited to ZERO please.

 

Please make both teams have an equal amount of destroyers's per game.

 

Thoughts? 

It is a disadvantage I think and things could get even worse.

Imagine the following scenario : Your team has a Khabarovsk and a Tashkent, both with heals and the enemy has 1 Gearing ,1 Fletcher and 1 Yugumo....And it is domination mode.......

[rvfharrier]

I've seen people claiming WG have statistics proving it doesn't make any sort of difference, but I simply can't see how it doesn't. In Domination, 1 vs 2 and 2 vs 3 DDs can be such a huge advantage to the latter team because it allows it to either get a cap guaranteed for free or to have a 2 vs 1 DD advantage at one of the caps, not only making it likely to get that cap but also to possibly kill the enemy DD and further increase the advantage.

[FallenOrchid]

1 hour ago, valoaa said:

I even remember (some time ago now) that this was semi-addressed with a patch where "the maximum difference in the number of destroyers per team is now limited to 1". Still needs to be limited to ZERO please.

 

 

And then you get matches with one team having DDs with good conceilment and only RU DD in the other team. People complain about imbalance again...

Next try: Both teams get same number of DD and of same nation. But hey, one team has more radar ships than the other. People complain about imbalance again...

And so on and so on.

 

You will never get rid of such (real or felt) imbalance (even if both teams have exactly the same ships, there are divisions, skill level of players, etc.). Sometimes the MM shows you the finger but different set up for the teams makes the game more interesting because you have to adjust to different settings each match. Make use of what you have in your team, coordinate.

[mtm78]

24 minutes ago, tank276 said:

It is a disadvantage I think and things could get even worse.

Imagine the following scenario : Your team has a Khabarovsk and a Tashkent, both with heals and the enemy has 1 Gearing ,1 Fletcher and 1 Yugumo....And it is domination mode.......

 

Indeed.

 

7 minutes ago, FallenOrchid said:

And then you get matches with one team having DDs with good conceilment and only RU DD in the other team. People complain about imbalance again...

Next try: Both teams get same number of DD and of same nation. But hey, one team has more radar ships than the other. People complain about imbalance again...

And so on and so on.

 

Lmao, yeah let's tell WG their MM is fine, we don't need them to work on better balanced teams right

 

Having 4 radars on one team and 0 on the other is just fun and engaging, right  

 

Please, just put a bin on top of your head and enjoy the view. 

 

7 minutes ago, FallenOrchid said:

You will never get rid of such (real or felt) imbalance (even if both teams have exactly the same ships, there are divisions, skill level of players, etc.). Sometimes the MM shows you the finger but different set up for the teams makes the game more interesting because you have to adjust to different settings each match. Make use of what you have in your team, coordinate.

 

Why are you crying about sbmm? This isn't about sbmm, I don't think sbmm would be 'fun' in particular for one.. But that has NOTHING to do with balancing on ship roles which actually is the biggest problem of the current MM.

 

 

[FallenOrchid]

32 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

Having 4 radars on one team and 0 on the other is just fun and engaging, right  

 

Please, just put a bin on top of your head and enjoy the view. 

 

Read again, I didn't say MM was perfect. But +-1 DD is not an issue which has to be addressed by WG.

[RUSSIANBlAS]

Good players are the most OP....

 

Although I really do have fun when I'm the only DD in a game with no CV. It's free reign as bad as when games didn't mirror CVs.

[Max_Kammerer]

1 hour ago, tank276 said:

It is a disadvantage I think and things could get even worse.

Imagine the following scenario : Your team has a Khabarovsk and a Tashkent, both with heals and the enemy has 1 Gearing ,1 Fletcher and 1 Yugumo....And it is domination mode.......

And it is unfortunately common situation, often connected with radar ships only in one team... MM in such cases has a key influence on team success in battle...

[tank276]

2 minutes ago, Max_Kammerer said:

And it is unfortunately common situation, often connected with radar ships only in one team... MM in such cases has a key influence on team success in battle...

+1

[tank276]

45 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

 

Indeed.

 

 

Lmao, yeah let's tell WG their MM is fine, we don't need them to work on better balanced teams right

 

Having 4 radars on one team and 0 on the other is just fun and engaging, right  

 

Please, just put a bin on top of your head and enjoy the view. 

 

 

Why are you crying about sbmm? This isn't about sbmm, I don't think sbmm would be 'fun' in particular for one.. But that has NOTHING to do with balancing on ship roles which actually is the biggest problem of the current MM.

 

 

+1

[Dragnorak]

2 hours ago, Negativvv said:

Good players are the most OP....

 

Although I really do have fun when I'm the only DD in a game with no CV. It's free reign as bad as when games didn't mirror CVs.

 

That's like a Lotto win for me!!

[Tugnut]

I find in games its the side that supports there said amount of DDs that win, and not who has more of them!  (aslo as said above dependent on your DD skills)

 

Was in a game the weekend that our 1 DD said he was going to get the enemy CV.... And the horror of watching and trying to talk him out of going down the middle of two brothers... and yes this was at the start of the game.... did not end well.

[Tubit101]

5 hours ago, valoaa said:

There are many "imbalances" moaned about, but none of them seem to me as game breaking as this...

 

One team, having more destroyers that the other!!!???

 

This is SUCH a disadvantage to the team with fewer destroyers I's unreal, especially on a map with 4 caps. Yes the team with fewer destroyers will have an extra cruiser but we all know that nowhere near makes up for it... I guess if this is ever addressed it will admit that destroyers simply carry games.

 

I even remember (some time ago now) that this was semi-addressed with a patch where "the maximum difference in the number of destroyers per team is now limited to 1". Still needs to be limited to ZERO please.

 

Please make both teams have an equal amount of destroyers's per game.

 

Thoughts? 

 

I absolutely agree. However, I would not put it so simple as that. DDs do not carry games per se, but they are crucial for capping, area control and area denial. Especially in game modes like Domination and Epicenter it is vital to have an equal number of DDs on each team, because those game modes inflate the importance of the DD role to a high degree.

 

I see that some say that it is more important to have skilled players. If you say this, you just don't get it. You don't understand why game balance is a thing or why it exists. Arguing against game balance is like arguing that people don't need to run the same distance during a race. If mechanics or other non skill-based factors skew game balance to a significant degree, then they must be adjusted. If someone thinks otherwise, they don't know the meaning of competition within the frame of reference we're talking about here, which is games.

[ColonelPete]

Not exactly the answer we got on the past, but close to it.

 

The past answer to this question was more detailed, but I cannot bookmark all WG information and therfore cannot find it anymore.

[Tubit101]

12 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

Not exactly the answer we got on the past, but close to it.

 

The past answer to this question was more detailed, but I cannot bookmark all WG information and therfore cannot find it anymore.

 

That is interesting, though. The way I see it, matches should always be as close to mirrored as possible. At the very least in terms of ship classes. WG seems to hold queue times above all else, which is the only reason I can see for not putting a heavier emphasis on an equal number of ship classes. I think they're going a bit overboard in that regard. Especially in Domination mode on maps like North     it certainly feels like DDs make a huge difference. They are pretty much the only ship class that can reliably cap bases without being detected immediately - and capping is pretty much what it's all about.

[mtm78]

I know of this answer you speak off, I think it WAS posted in the 'news from world' thread... but yeah good luck finding it as I don't know who posted it and can't limit my search to one person for that reason. 

 

I would have liked the answer if I had one left, I basically agree a ship composition difference isn't the end of the world. 

 

Why didn't you ask about the radar stacking per team which the MM is so fond off? That's a much more interesting topic imo as it's actually more influential ( again, imho ) as a single DD difference. 

 

edit:

 

@Tubit101 the previous answer actually had the complete statistics from a long period, it was much more interesting as this one ( as having data allows more 'theory crafting' ). 

[lameoll]

9 hours ago, Dragnorak said:

I think the main "imbalance" is how good are your DD's not how many of them have you got

yes but you cant know that so the best thing to do is at least have the same ammount of dds in each team.

its not even perfectly balanced then because it also depends if u have a dd with concealment or better torps or guns.

 

but at least evening out the dds on each team will go a long way. 

[Shaka_D]

It really is simple. The team with more dd's definitely has the intial advantage on capping and spotting. There can be no denial of this. This advantage is a game winner if used wisely. How the game progresses after this initial fact is chance in terms of how good the players are or how good the opposing team is - which is once again up to chance on how the mm distributed the players in its 'randomisation' before the game began.

 

WG won't fix this, it's too much effort for them. Their MM can be debated until the proverbial cows come home, it will never be perfect (which I can accept) but it does stink a lot of the time and sets up teams which are not only imbalanced in terms of players (which it doesn't even look at skill wise) but also messes up on the ships. Were a player rewarded for his own individual gameplay, i.e. personal effort and achievement, perhaps this wouldn't be so bad, but players are rewarded in terms of victory or loss, a team based result (randoms??) and it therefore highlights even more why a reasonably balanced MM is essential. It's already unfair to play the MM lotto and be dragged down by terrible players after playing so well, but to then saddle said players with rubbish ship distributions really can set the scenario for a 'landslide' or very one-sided game. Its not fun either way, win or lose.

 

And WG wonder why players get so frustrated, so irrirtated, so impatient, and so toxic. They've laid the foundation for it all, haha.

[Culiacan_Mexico]

10 hours ago, valoaa said:

...I guess if this is ever addressed it will admit that destroyers simply carry games....

I am neither agreeing or disagreeing with your statement, but the question is, in your opinion how?  

 

Just pulling out some number here.

DD Tier 8 - Kagero Average Damage per game 30,474

 

BB Tier 8 - Bismark Hit Points 64500
CA Tier 8 - Admiral Hipper  Hit Points 37,300

 

The average DD player is unable to do enough damage on a regular basis to sink a cruiser of the same tier, yet alone a BB.  On average it will take three Kagero to inflict enough damage onto a Bismarck that is able to use heals.   DDs on average can not carry games by just inflicting damage.  So how are they so powerful at carrying games?

 

Because they cap?  DDs on average, because they lack damage output and health, can not hold caps.  They might take one temporarily, but a determine opponent will simply take it away from them.  So how can they carry games?

 

 

[Culiacan_Mexico]

9 hours ago, rvfharrier said:

I've seen people claiming WG have statistics proving it doesn't make any sort of difference, but I simply can't see how it doesn't. In Domination, 1 vs 2 and 2 vs 3 DDs can be such a huge advantage to the latter team because it allows it to either get a cap guaranteed for free or to have a 2 vs 1 DD advantage at one of the caps, not only making it likely to get that cap but also to possibly kill the enemy DD and further increase the advantage.

My opinion.  DDs in themselves are generally too weak to carry games on a constant basis.  To be successful in DDs constantly, you have to be an enabler... enhancing the game play of your team mates.  Scouting, spotting, smoke, etc will improve the game for your team mates and give you a better chance to win, but it depends on your team mates.  

 

A DD supporting team mates gives advantages, but two DDs in the same area doesn't have double the effect.  Sometimes DD is the same area interfere with each other.  They lack synergy.

[rvfharrier]

14 minutes ago, Culiacan_Mexico said:

Just pulling out some number here.

DD Tier 8 - Kagero Average Damage per game 30,474

 

BB Tier 8 - Bismark Hit Points 64500
CA Tier 8 - Admiral Hipper  Hit Points 37,300

 

The average DD player is unable to do enough damage on a regular basis to sink a cruiser of the same tier, yet alone a BB.  On average it will take three Kagero to inflict enough damage onto a Bismarck that is able to use heals.   DDs on average can not carry games by just inflicting damage.  So how are they so powerful at carrying games?

 

Depends, a well played DD has immense carrying potential and doesn't even have to do that much damage in the process. A poorly played DD is just as useless as any other class poorly played of course, so average stats don't tell the full story in that regard. In my opinion DDs and CVs are the two classes with the biggest carrying potential, but at the end of the day it's the DDs who secure the caps which has the biggest influence on the victory. They're also stealthy and fast enough to be in the right place at the right time to maximize influence. Raw damage output isn't everything.

 

14 minutes ago, Culiacan_Mexico said:

Because they cap?  DDs on average, because they lack damage output and health, can not hold caps.  They might take one temporarily, but a determine opponent will simply take it away from them.  So how can they carry games?

 

 DDs secure caps, the rest of the team helps to hold them.

 

2 minutes ago, Culiacan_Mexico said:

My opinion.  DDs in themselves are generally too weak to carry games on a constant basis.  To be successful in DDs constantly, you have to be an enabler... enhancing the game play of your team mates.  Scouting, spotting, smoke, etc will improve the game for your team mates and give you a better chance to win, but it depends on your team mates.  

 

A DD supporting team mates gives advantages, but two DDs in the same area doesn't have double the effect.  Sometimes DD is the same area interfere with each other.  They lack synergy.

 

All things that a well played DD can do to help the team win, yes. And with regards to the two DDs in the same area, I'm talking about the initial contesting of the cap. Two DDs are simply going to be more likely to take a cap from a single DD and possibly kill that DD in the process. If that team had a DD advantage to begin with then them ganging up on and killing a DD in a cap further presses that advantage.