NoloContendere

A bit dastardly if you are a low performing CV player but High Cal is super easy to pick up in ranked. The smaller team size significantly reduces the damage you have to do to pick it up. Also, at least in Gold, players are better at managing their DCP and Repair Party. There is plenty of total HP to farm.

I would say, almost exclusively, the resources and tools that help people get better at this game are created by high level players. I also do not see any purple players coming to the forums to complain about griefing. I wonder where the resent and hatred gets you in the end? Not very far I reckon. This is my point to the OP. Perhaps, rather than be butt hurt by the messenger or the way they conveyed the message, their is some truth in what is being said and you might examine the underlining message. You made it more difficult for your team to win. People, at the very highest level of the game, do not enjoy playing with you. You are not as good as you think you are.

Well friend, this will be my last reply because we seem to be talking past each other. I'll let whatever you write next stand as the final word. You say purple players are not the sole arbiters of play. Sole, I can agree with. However, they are the best judge of what passes as good play. Players that deal large amounts of damage with a high WR have obviously figured out something the rest of us have not. I would much rather take their advice than ignore it. If, consistently, they were telling me they did not enjoy playing with me, I would interpret that as a problem in my approach to the the game. High rated players can make mistakes and die to their lowly counterparts. However, they have demonstrated over the course of thousands of games that they have a better understanding than most of how to play the game. May we all reach that promise land. You ask why purple players are upset. I think it is a given that purple players have dedicated some time and energy to being good at the game. They want to perform at a high level, play well, win. When they feel you are actively hurting them in this effort, they are unhappy with you. It's like playing tennis with an 8 year old as your doubles partner. Their will be no grand rallies, no satisfying points. It's a complete disruption of your own game if your partner cannot hold their side of the court. You can still have a fun match with mismatched teams. It depends on the basic competency of those on the playing field. Purple players are telling you that you lack the basic competency to play with. As far as defending poor behavior, I am just really indifferent. You seem very concerned about toxicity, bullying, abusive behavior. To me, it is like the least interesting thing in the thread. You have a lot of tools to manage this both in game and in your own mindset.

You are missing the point. If I tried my very hardest, yet still, Elon Musk told me that he would rather I die than we do business together again, my take away would be, "I must be really bad at business." If the toxic comments make you sad, it is kind of whatever to me. The internet is not really a safe space. Sorry those people offended you I guess. I am more interested in the fact that many of the best players in the game do not think your play is top shelf, but you obviously do. I wonder who is right about that?

What a confusing thread. Very good players, even one who is unquestionably elite, are semi-consistently telling you they do not enjoy playing with you as a teammate. The response from most people is turn off chat... Maybe you should think about what is and is not a stupid thing. It seems the purple players are actually trying to nudge you in the direction of better team play. If you are not going to take their advice, who's advice will you take?

Uhhh wut. No one said there is a 1 to 1 torp to flood ratio so it is weird that you are refuting that. What people are challenging you on is your assertion that the torp to flood ratio is 3:1. There seems to be no evidence of that...anywhere...except evidently your summary screens.

Well, we can just dismiss you again. The bow is an unlucky place to take the torp. You are more likely to flood there. You want to take torps on the belt which offers decreased flooding chance. You do not really have command of basic game mechanics. There was a time when the forums were of higher quality. Dolphin would come and provide detailed Grozovoi strats. People would post and discuss penetration curves of BBs. Now we are reduced to you and your anecdotal uncorroborated analysis of the game summary screen being presented as immutable fact. This is just not the case and cannot, in good conscious, be presented that way. You should say something like, “In my experience, in reviewing the summary screen, is three torps lead to one flood.”

Dude...there is no such thing as a forum fact. Theories, like the one that you are propagating, that are also very prevalent on the forums: camo INCREASES the accuracy of ships firing at you, the MM is against me and, my all time favorite, ships just go invisible around me. You cannot present something that you and the other crack pot regulars around here believe is true as a verified game mechanic. Flooding is influenced by the location which the torps hit on the ship. In other words, players have some control over the frequency they flood. There is no fixed 3 to 1 ratio.

Your presenting your theory as though it is a well known game mechanic that is documented and widely verified. It is not and it’s strange for you to do so.

Ummm, great!?!?! Is this not a desired outcome? This is fantastic for BOTH pools of players. People can play at their speed around the clock in bronze while being removed from gold player pools. I am not looking for unwordly outcomes of exactly matched teams and I don't think most players are either. However, the prospect of dumping some red out of my MMM is highly attractive.

Everyone is free to grind away at the level they can achieve, no doubt. However, to get into the gold bracket will take some work for the average 50% player. That is really all I am looking for. I think the result of this MM will be that 80% of the players in gold are 50% win rate or better. If you gave me 12 v 12 with that MM, I would be a happy human. If your running MMM in randoms you can see at least 50% of the players you are playing against are red. I have nothing against the 50% and lower crowd. Enjoy the game the way you enjoy it. If we were to matchmake this way in randoms you would have beginners and bads playing each other learning about the game and experienced players playing each other. That is what I am after. No doubt, Silver will have some poor players. However, it will also have filtered out a lot of people who are just derping around. There is a skill/time/effort sort happening here that results in incrementally better player pools no matter how slight the difference. This is 100% true in my opinion. I am not looking to filter outliers. This is not precision tuning for optimum MM. This is very deftly influencing the pool of players you see while having an operational MM that can produce games in under 2 minutes.

Working as intended imo? You would only expect true bads or people who play the game sparingly to be left behind in bronze. The gate is low. You are talking about a mediocre player that has played previous seasons. Great, enjoy your silver games buddy. The irrevocables, appropriately phase out.

No sarcasm friend. It is genuinely nice to play matches in sorted skill based pools. That should be what we do in randoms. Unfortunately, this vague skill sorting, while great for randoms, means ranked has lost its meaning.

Kudos to WG for stumbling upon the solution to the MM problem in new ranked. With a season always running, and a very slight sorting of the player pool based on the the three tiers, we get sorted MM based on your ability to win. This is [edited]terrific and all anyone ever wanted. We never needed a strict ELO system or a secret sauce algorithm. This just separates unicums from people who are new to the game or just want to derp around. Excellent. This should be the 12 v 12 MM

Pretty firm in your beliefs but kind of average in the results department. I might be open to other suggestions on how to play if I were you. Additionally, to address your anecdote, I would add that survival is not always advantageous to the team. If your goal is to win (granted, it may not be), you may have to sacrifice yourself to the Halland to apply some damage. Later, the CV can finish him. Allowing the Halland to run wild may not have been great in this scenario. Often, at critical junctures in the game, ships are sailing to the back of the map and prioritizing survival. This is an active contributor to loses.