Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
RAHJAILARI

Rebalancing Tiers to improve gameplay

48 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[ONE2]
Players
2,929 posts
17,207 battles

Since we always seem to be getting complaints (and not without good reason, mind you) about MM and also about playing bottom-tier in matches (strangely no-one seems to complain about being the top-tier?). How about the following ideas to ease the burden on Matchmaker, as well as to balance out and improve gameplay in general... Oh yeah, I did write them down before in another thread, but it seemed that this topic should have its own so here goes, my apologies for repetition.:Smile_sceptic:

 

Bottom-tiered ships in any battle are basically there just for cannon-fodder and HP-farming for the top tiers with no actual chance of impacting the game or performing well (try playing any non-premium tier 8 Cruiser or BB in tier 10 game, if unsure what I am talking about). A notable exception to this rule are the DD's, due to their stealth and torp combination, a tier 8 DD is still able to perform well even when uptiered, which is not the case with any other ship class. :cap_hmm:

 

Of course, as usual this is due to poor game design (WG just hasn't given this any thought and does not see it, as a problem - perhaps they do not play their own game or some such). No provisions at all have been made which would provide bottom-tier ships any kind of a niche in any game within which they could perform well aside of sheer dumb luck. They have no advantage in HP, stealth, in shell fire.chance, armor, agility, range or speed. So basically all one can expect is to get a paddling with no hope of a reprieve almost regardless of the player performance (unicums and supers exempted here). :fish_boom:

 

Of course, it does not have to be this way, the game could provide some reprieve for bottom-tier ships, which would enable even an average player to get some positive result, even when bottom-tier. :cap_old:

 

For example, as follows:

 

1) Game could be designed so that bottom-tier ships (being obviously less powerful and therefore also physically smaller) would always have better base-concealment values, that their higher-tier cousins (yes always - all ship classes). This would at the least allow them the theoretical advantage of firing the first salvo (make it count though, as after that you might still be dead fairly quickly). I know, it's not much but it is SOMETHING to go by at the least.:cap_yes:

2) The base agility of ships, as reflected in terms of turning radius should also be better for lower tier ships in general, so they would have at the least some chance to "dodge the bullet" occasionally instead of just providing a basically immobile target. This would also make for a potentially bone-chilling fun gameplay.:Smile_teethhappy:

2) The base fire chance should be the same for all ships (currently this % very strongly favors the higher tier ships) regardless of tier.:Smile_popcorn:

3) The "Bloom effect" should be set to be at minimum the same as the main battery reload time and the Concealment System Modification upgrade should be made unavailable for all battleships (yea, I know that BB players will hate this, but the concept of a "stealth BB" makes no sense whatsoever). This would also, give Cruisers a little something to survive by, as opposed to being immediately insta-killed by a horde of BB's in every high tier game.:Smile_smile:

4) Make the smaller tier planes (them being smaller, you know) harder to hit with heavy AA guns. So only close range light AA would be fully effective against them. This should give CV's some chance to get results, even when playing bottom-tier methinks. :Smile_medal: This rule could be applied, as follows: top tier CV -> all AA is fully effective, mid-tier (tier 9 in a game with tier 8-10 ships) CV -> close and mid-range AA is fully effective and finally bottom-tier CV -> only close range AA is fully effective. The reduction in heavy and mid-range AA effectiveness could be somewhere in the range of 25% to 50% for example (this would have to be play-tested to see where iot balances out, if course).:Smile_great:

 

These changes might improve gameplay overall and also offer even the bottom-tier players some ray of hope to get a result out of the game. :cap_like:

 

Admittedly, all this would not radically alter the game itself and bottom-tiers would still remain at a massive disadvantage, but some slight improvement is clearly needed anyways. This could work. Soo what'cha think guys?:Smile_great:

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
19,535 posts
12,253 battles

If you are cann fodder every time you are bottom tier, you are doing it wrong.

Carried enough games vs Tier+2 ships.

You just have to be more careful.

  • Cool 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertester
374 posts
3,435 battles

Nice ideas, but to do these things would mean too many variables in ship stats in different games, and nothing said if a ship is mid-tier. 

 

+-1 MM still the best possible thing that could happen, since we have 30k people at least on EU, and a f*uckton of ships are being introduced to every tier/line. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ONE2]
Players
2,929 posts
17,207 battles

Oh Herr @ColonelPete. You misunderstand, i do not have huge problems personally (well, sometimes I do but generally speaking). But just check the many threads we have about MM and the latest about a self-destruct button (which is where I got this idea from) and you see what I mean. I also would not mind a bit improved chances to play aggressively even when bottom tier (other that just playing DD all the time). I do understand that an average player will have big issues, when bottom-tiered and this will generate resentment, if people feel that MM is somehow "unfair" all or much of the time. Also, more popular the game, the better our chances of getting that +-1 matchmaking so many times wished for.:cap_haloween:

 

So providing players a little bit of something (an advantage, no matter how small) would probably make things more interesting, as being bottom-tier would not be so much viewed, as an automatic death-penalty but instead an an interesting challenge - Dont'cha think?:Smile_smile:

 

of course, we could just go with the +-1 MM @RethyI and be done with it, but since that does not seem to be happening any time soon then perhaps there are other options too. And yeah, i do think this might make the gameplay more fun and engagingl.:cap_like:

 

 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
6,314 posts
7,398 battles
25 minutes ago, RAHJAILARI said:

2) The base fire chance should be the same for all ships (currently this % very strongly favors the higher tier ships) regardless of tier.:Smile_popcorn:

 

U forgot that higher tier ships also got a better fire resistance coefficient...

http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Fire

So not only has the lower tier ships a worse fire chance, no, he is even more punished by that, and thats hidden information too!

 

29 minutes ago, RAHJAILARI said:

Bottom-tiered ships in any battle are basically there just for cannon-fodder and HP-farming for the top tiers with no actual chance of impacting the game or performing well

 

Have to disagree to that ofc :cap_cool:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KVOR]
Alpha Tester
1,102 posts
2,609 battles

Despite some good ideas, how to improve the situation for the -2 tier ships, i think a +/-1 tier mm would simply be the best solution. It affects all tiers and classes the same way, without tinkering around with any stats of the ships. If WG would start to change numbers, it wouldn´t take too long until someone shows up whining and complaining, because he/she suspects any disadvantage or whatever. People are very creative when it comes up to complain about something, you know...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ONE2]
Players
2,929 posts
17,207 battles
3 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

U forgot that higher tier ships also got a better fire resistance coefficient...

http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Fire

So not only has the lower tier ships a worse fire chance, no, he is even more punished by that, and thats hidden information too!

Oh yeah, you're right I did forget that.. Perhaps the same fire resistance as well then? Thanks for reminding. :fish_cute_2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ONE2]
Players
2,929 posts
17,207 battles

True dat @Vaderan however it seems that we cannot get there despite frequent requests. So perhaps tweaking the game mechanics in this way would slightly "even up the playing field" so to speak and result in popularizing the game more instead of discouraging people to keep going. :Smile_smile:

 

I think our chances of getting that +-1 matchmaking in the end would be vastly better, if we would have 100k players instead of just 30k but before that can happen we have to get there first. :Smile_glasses:

 

You know, just stubbornly demanding +-1 or a +-0 MM, not getting it and doing nothing else, is kinda unproductive after all. :fish_happy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AMOK]
Players
1,543 posts
7,416 battles
3 minutes ago, Vaderan said:

Despite some good ideas, how to improve the situation for the -2 tier ships, i think a +/-1 tier mm would simply be the best solution. It affects all tiers and classes the same way, without tinkering around with any stats of the ships. If WG would start to change numbers, it wouldn´t take too long until someone shows up whining and complaining, because he/she suspects any disadvantage or whatever. People are very creative when it comes up to complain about something, you know...

And if u do a +-1 MM u will have the same discussions about a +-0 MM. People are always better in complaining than improving their selves.

 

Anyway a reduced bloom for DD/CL/CA or longer for BB is worth thinking about especially in regards of MM. But u need sure instinct for that so not gonna happen :Smile_teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BABBY]
Players
473 posts
8,794 battles

My suggestion is to either remove/rework the high-tier upgrade slots or let all tiers have access to them (this would promote nasty seal-cubbing though..). This way the power gap is not so big anymore at t7 vs t8 (concealment) and t8 vs t9/10 (reload, range) and the tiers are easier to balance between each other. If you need another credit sink just increase the silver ship prices and there, done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
4,945 posts
7,322 battles
1 hour ago, RAHJAILARI said:

(try playing any non-premium tier 8 Cruiser or BB in tier 10 game, if unsure what I am talking about)

1 hour ago, RAHJAILARI said:

just check the many threads we have about MM

NC. Amagi. Bismark. They're not premium, but they can absolutely stand their ground in a t10 game. It's just annoying to be uptiered all the time, that's it.

"Oh but where's Monarch? That would totally prove my point!" A game could have 11x t6 ships and a Monarch per team, those Monarchs would still do badly. It's just a bad ship, nothing more to it.

 

Your whole post can be summed up with these 3 points:

  • Higher tier ship should always be worse than lower tier ship because reasons
  • Floating oneshot complaining about BBs
  • "I don't play CVs so I'm an expert on them"

 

If you check who actually post "all those topics about MM" it's either someone frustrated about being bottom tier more than enough times in a row and simply venting or, as it is in most cases, some incompetent potato having no clue what he's doing just blaming everything but himself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ONE2]
Players
2,929 posts
17,207 battles
22 minutes ago, wilkatis_LV said:

Your whole post can be summed up with these 3 points:

  • Higher tier ship should always be worse than lower tier ship because reasons
  • Floating oneshot complaining about BBs
  • "I don't play CVs so I'm an expert on them"

Tut tut @wilkatis_LV now you are just being unnecessarily mean and completely misinterpreting the entire post. I never said high tier should be worse, because it never will be. Giving up a slight advantage in stealth or agility (both of which are justifiable when comparing the actual ship sizes - It always made more sense to me that a larger ship would be spotted further away than a smaller one, that's all) while maintaining all the other perks (superior firepower, range, armor, speed, HP) hardly constitutes a fundamentally game-breaking change.:Smile_smile:

 

Also, I do not think I have ever been a floating oneshot in any tier but yes, I do not play CV's - Maybe later. However many CV players keep mentioning this as an issue and I have played enough games in Mogami against a tier 6 CV to know they generally constitute no danger to me at any time and I do not think that should be the case especially, since Mogami's AA is quite bad for its tier.:cap_old:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertester
2,386 posts
10,081 battles

Terrible ideas by someone falling in with the "I have no clue how to play this game, but I need to blame someone else but myself"-crowd. Let's just erradicate all differences between tiers or, in some to most cases, make lower tiers straight up better than higher tiers! Cunning plan. Can we close this already?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
122 posts
7,470 battles

after enough battles i can say that the only bad thing i find with the current MM is the fact that T8 cruisers are most of the time screwed. on the other hand, players seem to be quite religious about camping. especially BB captains, even if there are no DDs around. wargaming should make a simple tutorial saying just 4 words. DO NOT F.CKING CAMP

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertester
2,386 posts
10,081 battles
Just now, captain_lef said:

after enough battles i can say that the only bad thing i find with the current MM is the fact that T8 cruisers are most of the time screwed. on the other hand, players seem to be quite religious about camping. especially BB captains, even if there are no DDs around. wargaming should make a simple tutorial saying just 4 words. DO NOT F.CKING CAMP

Would be a pretty terrible tutorial. Sometimes, camping wins games. Seen too many teams throwing matches because some people are yelling "no, you need to push idiot!" and then sail into their unnecessary death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
122 posts
7,470 battles
1 minute ago, Earl_of_Northesk said:

Would be a pretty terrible tutorial. Sometimes, camping wins games. Seen too many teams throwing matches because some people are yelling "no, you need to push idiot!" and then sail into their unnecessary death.

i see your point there, but everyone on this forum knows what i'm talking about mate. camping is different than positioning. if only more could differentiate between these terms. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
535 posts
6,957 battles

And how about option before every game like this one

 

before you press battle button you could chose :

 

same tier +0% xp/cred.

+1 tier +50% xp/cred.

+2 tier +100% xp/cred.

 

in that way better players would chose +2 tier to get more from time they spend and to have more challenging battles and random normal players or players that want more normal casual gameplay will chose same tier..

 

laso last 2 or 3  in +2 tier would get -100/150% xp/cred just to be sure they are not into +2 tier to be carry on ..

 

it is really easy solution for 90% of problems we have atm - and for the biggest one ( as we have seen in topic today ) - players that get into +2 tier games and don't want to play and they yolo to die fast or do nothing entire battle ( like cv player told us he did ), that is a really big problem and we have more and more of players like he is 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
179 posts
1,809 battles

with the mm being +2 after tier 4 is meant to give you a challenge and overall i belive it balances out overall .

i would love it if mm was same same as coop mirror image , but think that would take wads of waiting time so probally a +1 would be better i think .

 

wg they cant or should say most probally would not want it skilled based because then half the good players would become not so good because they be playing against players at thier level so half of them would loose and have lower stats .

 

unless there was a all players had to do a poll then it would show what the player base wanted .or just hide all stats for all players then no one would moan look at me win loss ratio . mine is 0 since only play coop since beta wipe .

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
898 posts
6,583 battles

If you are bottom tier you gain more exp/credits for the battle as mid/top tier. When i saw in my Mogami a Yama or GK i thought:" oh hell yes some easy dmg points" and not "OMG A YAMATO WITH 460 GUNS". Be happy with +2 in the past there was +3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ONE2]
Players
2,929 posts
17,207 battles

Hheh, yeah it still could happen tho. I recently accidentally went to play division with a Graf Spee instead of the intended Myoko... Somehow I was not even the last in team and managed to torp and sink a Tirpitz and a DD (forgot which one it was because smoke) before my demise so it was an OK game in fact. Though I admit playing a tad defensive at first.:cap_look:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
8,241 posts
11,737 battles

WG could possibly adopt the 3/5/7 WoT MM where the 3 is top tier, 5 mid and 7 bottom tier. Lots whine about it in WoT but I think it's workable. WoT actually has way more players than this game however.

 

The only time I really see MM as a big issue here is as a T8 Cruiser where you can often be the only T8 in a sea of T10s that you can't pen or fire spam.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertester
2,386 posts
10,081 battles
6 minutes ago, Negativvv said:

WG could possibly adopt the 3/5/7 WoT MM where the 3 is top tier, 5 mid and 7 bottom tier. Lots whine about it in WoT but I think it's workable. WoT actually has way more players than this game however.

 

The only time I really see MM as a big issue here is as a T8 Cruiser where you can often be the only T8 in a sea of T10s that you can't pen or fire spam.

Tiering within +2 MM needs to be more balanced, that I do agree on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
4,945 posts
7,322 battles
27 minutes ago, RAHJAILARI said:

I never said high tier should be worse, because it never will be.

Didn't huh?

2 hours ago, RAHJAILARI said:

Game could be designed so that bottom-tier ships would always have better base-concealment values

2 hours ago, RAHJAILARI said:

The base agility of ships, as reflected in terms of turning radius should also be better for lower tier ships in general

Yeah, totally did not.

 

Thing you are failing to realize is that pretty much always they already have one or multiple stats better than higher tier ships. Including your mentioned stealth and turning radius.

 

33 minutes ago, RAHJAILARI said:

I do not think I have ever been a floating oneshot in any tier

That obviously refers to you playing DDs and CA/Ls. Ships that can and often are oneshot

 

34 minutes ago, RAHJAILARI said:

against a tier 6 CV

t4 & t5 CVs are useless, the only way how t6 CVs differ is by getting manual attacks. They still have no plane reserves while always playing against AA ships. When looking at CVs look from t7 and up.

"Oh but t6 also get uptiered". Yeah, and same way as NewYork or Monarch - bad ship is bad no matter if it's top or bottom tier

 

27 minutes ago, Cime said:

before you press battle button you could chose :

 

same tier +0% xp/cred.

+1 tier +50% xp/cred.

+2 tier +100% xp/cred.

You already get more XP & credits for attacking higher tier enemies. While I understand your numbers are arbitrary, that MM would work only for t8+ bcuz noone would take top tier games when they can have a bad bottom tier game and still receive more xp / credits for it. No ships to put at top tier = no ships to grant you that +2 MM

 

30 minutes ago, Cime said:

in that way better players would chose +2 tier to get more from time they spend and to have more challenging battles and random normal players or players that want more normal casual gameplay will chose same tier..

Quite the opposite. Good players could get themselves top tier for easy carries, while the average player grinding his ship trying to speed up the grind would be constantly feasted upon.

 

31 minutes ago, Cime said:

it is really easy solution

It is really easy way to throw any kind of MM into the garbage can and break down the whole game to a point where everyone stop playing within a week.

 

29 minutes ago, knaveofengland said:

only play coop since beta wipe

While we are speaking of things we have no clue of - I think if doctors in hospitals during surgery used those one-time use plastic knifes you can get a whole package for just a few cents at every store medical departments could save a lot of money, right?

 

If you don't play PvP I'm pretty sure it's not your place to comment what PvP MM should be like.

 

10 minutes ago, Negativvv said:

WG could possibly adopt the 3/5/7 WoT MM where the 3 is top tier, 5 mid and 7 bottom tier. Lots whine about it in WoT but I think it's workable. WoT actually has way more players than this game however.

Would be nice but the answer we'd get is "too few players for that MM"

 

In fact, just reducing the number of 10s played all the time (by actually making them lose money instead of "me has premium camo, me do 0 damage, me still earn cash!" that we have right now) would make mid tiers far better place to be at

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
8,241 posts
11,737 battles

Part of the MM issue is WG's business model.

 

If you spend Free XP and get a gun upgrade or Hull B etc (preferably both) then it often smooths your way. It's when you get Cruisers who are bottom tier with awful guns and a slow rudder from stock hull that kills them.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×