Jump to content

tenfingerstentoes

Members
  • Content Сount

    180
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    2658
  • Clan

    [BOATC]

Community Reputation

50 Good

About tenfingerstentoes

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. tenfingerstentoes

    Supertest: Damage Limit DD vs BB

    Everyone gets spotted playing in a DD. I could dig up Flamu's video where he explains this issue in depth, but he essentially explains that, even he (someone who is super unicum in literally every ship type in the game, with a 62%+ solo win rate) gets spotted all the time in DDs when trying to play the objective. Between radar, hydro, spotting planes, unexpected people yolo'ing around islands, or because you want to, you know, play the objective, and try to put some pressure on an enemy DD with your guns, while you are reasnonably far away from their teamamtes, you will be spotted in range of someone's guns, every game. Now, the real issue is, once you are, and, as you said, you get fired upon by their force, you now have a real issue. You want to angle, to make yourself a smaller target, and to perhaps bounce some British CL AP. But, angling now means you are far more likely to eat a BB full AP pen, for, you know, more than half of your health. The issue has become that getting spotted once, for a few seconds, because you're trying to do the things you need to do to help your team win, means you have a reasonable chance of getting more than half your health taken away. This has not been a snap decision, this is their third attempt at coming up with a system that alleviates the issue while not causing other unintended consequences to other penetration. Honestly, this change is nothing, you guys should really be upset about the proposed "0-damage pen" fix. Because, that's uhhh, significantly worse for BBs and something I don't agree with at all.
  2. tenfingerstentoes

    Black ships... No thanks!

    Honestly, I would be much happier being able to buy a black perma-camo for my favorite ships, rather than just another copy of the ship. I have a lot of fun in Asashio and Massachusetts, and I would love to have an alternate camo to run them in, but no real interest in having a separate ship.
  3. tenfingerstentoes

    Supertest: Damage Limit DD vs BB

    It is the design of the game that BBs are supposed to be weak to DDs. The intent, from the outset, is that a BB loses to a DD, a DD loses to a CA/L, and a CA/L loses to a BB. Have you been on both sides of the fence here? I mean I don't have a ton of BB experience but I'm moving toward high tiers in them now and BB AP on DDs is disgustingly powerful. Snap shots on a Kitakaze at 11km away from me in a Richelieu - 12k damage. For a dude that was spotted for literally a total of 4 seconds in front of me. Its a long standing problem that needs to be addressed.
  4. tenfingerstentoes

    Supertest: Damage Limit DD vs BB

    Harugumo and Khaba are specifically excluded. You cannot easily roll up to BBs in higher tiers. Lowe tiers teach you this but once you hit tier 7 or 8 it rapidly becomes just suicide. The engagement distances are larger and larger for those ships. Yolo'ing a BB at high tiers means wading through a bunch of cruiser fire, and probably getting blapped by the BB, and if not also perhaps likely not killing the BB even if you do land torps. This change is still going to make these shots hit DDs hard but it also helps the problem that DDs have to play incredibly passive or risk losing all of their health just by being spotted once at 12km out.
  5. tenfingerstentoes

    This Game Very Badly Needs an Actual MM system

    Well if they do then thanks to GPDR they have to provide them to you if you ask....
  6. tenfingerstentoes

    This Game Very Badly Needs an Actual MM system

    I understand perfectly what I'm asking for. A quick, simple solution used for further study. All the "but what if" stuff is just as I said, letting perfect be the enemy of good.
  7. tenfingerstentoes

    This Game Very Badly Needs an Actual MM system

    So balance the remaining non CV players. I mean who cares about CVs anyway they are beibrg replaced soon. You can balance uneven divs as well by just making the same number groupings of similar skill players. It's not hard.
  8. tenfingerstentoes

    This Game Very Badly Needs an Actual MM system

    Take the pool of players for a game as already given by the matchmaker. Sort them by WTR or PR, top on one team, second highest on the other and so on.
  9. tenfingerstentoes

    This Game Very Badly Needs an Actual MM system

    Well the noticeable effects might be the knowledge that if I have a carrier sniping wide spread torp firing DD on my side, the other is likely to have a player with equally poor choices. If we still lose so be it but I can at least now reasonably believe it wasn't because my random team wasn't saddled with all of the players unable to contribute.
  10. tenfingerstentoes

    This Game Very Badly Needs an Actual MM system

    I don't want to know the rating it uses. I don't want any identity or class warfare. Just a line in a release note that says it's implemented.
  11. tenfingerstentoes

    This Game Very Badly Needs an Actual MM system

    So the problem I have with this and LWMs model is twofold. One, it's a gross simplification. Unicum players aren't just better at killing people, they make every other player on their team more effective by positioning themselves properly. They do things that have nothing to do with interacting with other players - they set up in the right spots to spot and do damage. Thus I don't think a simple kill% model really suffices. The other issue is that with the goal of satisfaction in mind, regardless of the actual results, I will always be more satisfied with a match if I have the knowledge that the matchmaking was balanced. It doesn't matter if the outcome would have been the same, it would just be nicer knowing there is as an attempt at balance
  12. tenfingerstentoes

    This Game Very Badly Needs an Actual MM system

    So, you're claiming that lopsided matches with somewhat-balanced skill on both sides will happen with the same frequency than with current odds of having extremely lopsided skill matchups? How do you figure? I mean, don't get me wrong, I don't think it solves everything, but I also don't think perfect should be the enemy of good. If it makes an improvement (and, without trying it you'll never get any data to say whether or not it would), it is still a net "good" even if bad things can still happen.
  13. tenfingerstentoes

    This Game Very Badly Needs an Actual MM system

    What problems would it create? Also, if you don't tell people the skill/rating that they are given, and simply make rosters based on it that look the same as they do today, what would there be to be salty about?
  14. tenfingerstentoes

    This Game Very Badly Needs an Actual MM system

    I don't think anyone disagrees with that, we're just saying it SHOULD be on the cards currently.
  15. tenfingerstentoes

    This Game Very Badly Needs an Actual MM system

    Its dangerous to assume what goes into a Software project you aren't familiar with. In a perfect world, or even a reasonably good one, sure those things should be true, and maybe they are. It's possible though that maybe MM counts on some third party integration, or some legacy code, that is infuriating/tedious/borderline impossible to work with, at least in an efficient way. Its possible that the APIs for stats retrieval are rate limited such that if suddenly every match were looking up everyone's stats, there would suddenly become load issues. There's also the issue that product owners have a roadmap, and if this isn't on it now, it will have to wait until it can be addressed. This maybe would take a Sprint, or two, but the stuff on the map ahead of it would take a lot longer. There are a bunch of factors that from the outside, we can't know, that could impact how feasible this is. I mean, in general I agree with you - this shouldn't be hard, especially just balancing out the pool of players the MM already selects, but Ive walked onto enough projects riddled with legacy dependencies and tech debt to know things that should be easy often aren't. I also agree that this SHOULD be on a roadmap, it should be implemented at least on a trial basis to see what kind of impact it makes on match satisfaction. I'm just saying don't judge the developers when you don't know what came before them, and what tasks they are on now, and what challenges even a seemingly easy task might present because of tech debt.
×