Jump to content


Should match making be switched to 1 tier up and 1 tier down?


  • Please log in to reply
170 replies to this topic

Fog_Cruiser_Maine #161 Posted 21 March 2017 - 01:33 AM

    Lieutenant Junior Grade

  • Members

  • 1,491
  • Member since:
    08-12-2014

Or how about WG fixes the broken tier 5, starting with Emerald and Omaha and work from there. And on top of that, how about WG makes it so Tier 5 can not see tier 7 BB's.

 

Problem solved.


Remember the Maine, Remember the Arizona! #neverforget | I support the USS Maine as a US premium! #GiveMeMaine

 

Statically speaking...


Formerly Luke_Skywalker01

 

DerKrampus #162 Posted 21 March 2017 - 01:51 AM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 809
  • Member since:
    07-01-2015

View PostFog_Cruiser_Maine, on 21 March 2017 - 01:33 AM, said:

Or how about WG fixes the broken tier 5, starting with Emerald and Omaha and work from there. And on top of that, how about WG makes it so Tier 5 can not see tier 7 BB's.

 

Problem solved.

 

Problem is, that just kicks the can down the line.  if T5s can't see T7BBs, then the T7BBs would just end up never seeing top tier.  They'd be the new T6: condemned to be low or mid-tier, unless they draw a fluke +-1 game.

And so on, and so on, and so forth.  The problem isn't the way T5s are matched.  The problem is in how T4s are matched.  It leaves 2 whole tiers without a lower rung upon which to climb.  And so, they end up being that bottom rung.

 

Experiments I ran on the subject, (by running my Texas something like 30 times in one night,) the number I came up with was 70%.  That's the likelihood of being bottom-tier in a T5 right now, and it echoes what others have reported.

 

The only logical solution is to either roll back the preferential MM that 3s and 4s get, or to apply it straight up the ladder to the top.  Otherwise, we're going to continue seeing whole tiers getting completely shafted.


 


Fog_Cruiser_Maine #163 Posted 21 March 2017 - 02:04 AM

    Lieutenant Junior Grade

  • Members

  • 1,491
  • Member since:
    08-12-2014

View PostDerKrampus, on 20 March 2017 - 06:51 PM, said:

 

Problem is, that just kicks the can down the line.  if T5s can't see T7BBs, then the T7BBs would just end up never seeing top tier.  They'd be the new T6: condemned to be low or mid-tier, unless they draw a fluke +-1 game.

And so on, and so on, and so forth.  The problem isn't the way T5s are matched.  The problem is in how T4s are matched.  It leaves 2 whole tiers without a lower rung upon which to climb.  And so, they end up being that bottom rung.

 

Experiments I ran on the subject, (by running my Texas something like 30 times in one night,) the number I came up with was 70%.  That's the likelihood of being bottom-tier in a T5 right now, and it echoes what others have reported.

 

The only logical solution is to either roll back the preferential MM that 3s and 4s get, or to apply it straight up the ladder to the top.  Otherwise, we're going to continue seeing whole tiers getting completely shafted.

 

Bit if you do that than tier 3 has an issue, and then at that point you chuck out the whole system.

 

It is either haveing to be all in our all out. We can't have one toe in and one toe out.

 


Remember the Maine, Remember the Arizona! #neverforget | I support the USS Maine as a US premium! #GiveMeMaine

 

Statically speaking...


Formerly Luke_Skywalker01

 

TalonV #164 Posted 21 March 2017 - 02:36 AM

    Admiral of the Navy

  • Alpha Tester
  • Beta Testers

  • 25,909
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostFog_Cruiser_Maine, on 20 March 2017 - 08:33 PM, said:

Or how about WG fixes the broken tier 5, starting with Emerald and Omaha and work from there. And on top of that, how about WG makes it so Tier 5 can not see tier 7 BB's.

 

Problem solved.

Then you just screw tier 6 even harder then screw tier 7.

View PostFog_Cruiser_Maine, on 20 March 2017 - 09:04 PM, said:

 

Bit if you do that than tier 3 has an issue, and then at that point you chuck out the whole system.

 

It is either haveing to be all in our all out. We can't have one toe in and one toe out.

 

 

Better solution, buff the tier 3s.

 

​This isn't dueling pistols at dawn. This is war. In war you

never want to fight fair. You want to sneak up behind

the enemy, and bash him over the head.


Fog_Cruiser_Maine #165 Posted 21 March 2017 - 03:12 AM

    Lieutenant Junior Grade

  • Members

  • 1,491
  • Member since:
    08-12-2014

View PostTalonV, on 20 March 2017 - 07:36 PM, said:

Then you just screw tier 6 even harder then screw tier 7.

 

Better solution, buff the tier 3s.

 

Except for St. Louis, and also give something to the tier 2's. Then I will get on board with your position.
Remember the Maine, Remember the Arizona! #neverforget | I support the USS Maine as a US premium! #GiveMeMaine

 

Statically speaking...


Formerly Luke_Skywalker01

 

The_Sparrow #166 Posted 21 March 2017 - 03:20 AM

    Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 232
  • Member since:
    05-24-2015

View Postcomtedumas, on 19 March 2017 - 06:26 PM, said:

 

you can always go play pong if you don't like +/-1.  

 

Actually you seem to be the one that is upset with the game so maybe you should play pong because they will NEVER change the mm to +/- 1. I am ok with that because if you are good enough you can carry from bottom tier. I have carried T10 games in my NC. So +/-1 mm isn't needed. You want to do well in your games? Well git gud m8 :P

"Don't be an idiot, changed my life" -Dwight Schrute

USS Alabama will come all is right in the universe.

"The fighter consumable is just a poor-man's defensive fire, hydro, and radar"-Forumist


Soshi_Sone #167 Posted 21 March 2017 - 03:39 AM

    Lieutenant Junior Grade

  • Members

  • 1,493
  • Member since:
    11-01-2015

View PostEichbomb, on 20 March 2017 - 07:36 PM, said:

+/- 2 is fine. Seriously once you get it out of your head that you are useless as bottom tier, you won't notice.

 

^^^^This^^^^

 

And two examples from tonight.  First, I came in third in my Yamato.  Bested by a T9 BB....and....a T8 CA!!!!  This match had several T9 and T10 BB.  Not a particularly safe place for a T8 CA.  I doubt that cruiser captain felt he was "useless" being bottom tiered.

 

Spoiler

 

 

Second example is me tooting my horn.  Bottom tiered in a T6 BB, with several T7 and T8 BBs to contend with...not to mention a T8 CV.  Did I feel worthless? No.  Got in there and made a scrap.  Got several hits on the Tirp, the NC (secondaries and one torp!), and even the CV.

 

Spoiler

 

 

Personally, I think half the problem is the "thought" leads to the proverbial self fulfilling prophesy.   "Think" you are worthless, and you will play with a defeated mindset which will, in turn, lead to defeat.  In short, "think" you are worthless and you "become" worthless.  Think "can do" and you will discover that you can do it.  Sure, every bottom tier game won't have you topping out.  And there will be disappointments.  But get in the "can do" mindset, and you will do better.  And eventually, you will barely notice.  Only enough to properly assess your strengths and weaknesses vs opponent.  Play to strengths, minimize your weaknesses, attack weaknesses of the opponent.  



TalonV #168 Posted 21 March 2017 - 03:42 AM

    Admiral of the Navy

  • Alpha Tester
  • Beta Testers

  • 25,909
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostFog_Cruiser_Maine, on 20 March 2017 - 10:12 PM, said:

 

Except for St. Louis, and also give something to the tier 2's. Then I will get on board with your position.

 

St Louis is easy to kill. Just aim at the waterline for the back 3rd. Citadel city. Rip them to pieces with a tier 4 BB.

 

​This isn't dueling pistols at dawn. This is war. In war you

never want to fight fair. You want to sneak up behind

the enemy, and bash him over the head.


JER1971 #169 Posted 21 March 2017 - 04:35 AM

    Seaman Recruit

  • Members

  • 4
  • Member since:
    11-16-2014
What if the player had a setting for their MM +/- preferences?
 
    Option 1 2 3 4 5 6
Priority 1st   +/- 2 +/- 2 +/- 1 +/- 1 +/- 0 +/- 0
  2nd   +/- 1 +/- 0 +/- 2 +/- 0 +/- 2 +/- 1
  3rd   +/- 0 +/- 1 +/- 0 +/- 2 +/- 1 +/- 2

Let MM sort it out?  Queue weight is higher on +/-2 , so those games get filled from +/-1 & +/-0 if queue time gets too high.


Nordmanni #170 Posted 24 March 2017 - 03:41 AM

    Seaman

  • Members

  • 15
  • Member since:
    10-14-2016
Would be balanced if the MM +/-2 had some spread, so that there's always approx. a third of each tier involved.  Being solo tier VI against a fleet of tier VIII is just silly, and no fun.  That's what would be good to have fixed.

TalonV #171 Posted 24 March 2017 - 03:44 AM

    Admiral of the Navy

  • Alpha Tester
  • Beta Testers

  • 25,909
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostNordmanni, on 23 March 2017 - 10:41 PM, said:

Would be balanced if the MM +/-2 had some spread, so that there's always approx. a third of each tier involved.  Being solo tier VI against a fleet of tier VIII is just silly, and no fun.  That's what would be good to have fixed.

 

And not many people are going to argue that point. Even I find that quite stupid.

 

​This isn't dueling pistols at dawn. This is war. In war you

never want to fight fair. You want to sneak up behind

the enemy, and bash him over the head.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users