Jump to content
Forum Shutdown - July 28, 2023 Read more... ×
Forum Shutdown - July 28, 2023 Read more... ×


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

216 Valued poster


About Mudd_H_F__XX

  • Rank
    Warrant Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Mudd_H_F__XX


    There is the solution to all of the SBMM malarkey. Good players find and friend other good players, coordinate their playing time and division regularly. Any player good bad or ugly can do that and it just might help bad and ugly to get better. A SBMM that theoretically puts only good players vs good players, less good vs less good and very bad vs very bad Divisions are not is still going to have regular blowouts and possibly more draws. Every battle regardless of how the teams are made up is going to end 1 of 3 ways! Win, Lose or Draw. Perhaps the top 24 players, Legends in their own minds could set up battles in the training room. Mix and match ship types and tiers and sides using the current MM as a guide. Then play 100 battles and see how many blowout battles each player wins or loses in. I doubt that the results will be much different than what we have been seeing.
  2. Mudd_H_F__XX


    Well then perhaps you should write the program that does was you desire. The current MM uses only ship type and tier to make up 2 teams. MM also tries to mirror the ship types and tiers depending on the queue population. A tier 6 BB will be mirrored with a tier 6 BB not necessarily the same nation or ship. There is a restriction for DDs no more than 4 per team. Your last 20 battles in the tier you have chosen is also considered for tier 8 or less so that you will not be bottom tier more than 40% of the time. There is no consideration given to any player stat, player name nor how much money one spends. So there you have it. Hopefully you are highly skilled and type better than I. Times a wasting get flow charting and typing. In your 8 of 10 battles were blowouts the reason is that the team you were on made the first mistakes and lost a ship or two early. MM did not have anything to with random players playing stupid and players IQs are also not considered. If they were I would have a 80% or better win rate. We won't hold our breath.
  3. Mudd_H_F__XX

    Viribus Unitis?

    It is a good ship for it's tier. Try it enjoy it.
  4. Mudd_H_F__XX

    Gneisenau Turrets/Gun Option

    There are 2 Scharnhorst premiums in the game already. The normal one and the Black themed one. They both preform the same and giving Gneisenau that option would make 3. They could have easily made both as tech tree ships and gave both that option but they didn't.
  5. Mudd_H_F__XX

    Why not more missions?

    The scenario ops are rotated weekly, there have been more of them, some were removed when the odd tier CVs were removed. They also have easy and difficult. The difficult requires division play. The star rewards can only be awarded once. After you have a 5 star win on a scenario you only get the increased XP and credits. The campaigns mission are a mix of battle mode limits/requirements. The random only missions are meant to challenge regular co op only players. If you want the reward you play some random battles whether you like it or not.
  6. Mudd_H_F__XX


    Not any that help the least little. Take a deep breath and forget the malarkey you are spouting.
  7. Mudd_H_F__XX

    Way to Many One Sided Battles Lately

    They are no more frequent now than they were 5 years ago. The first team to make a mistake(s) is likely to get steamrolled regardless of how many good players they have.
  8. Well then commenting on posts like this is not only a waste of your time but also a waste of everyone else's time.
  9. Only twice? Were you the only reporter? How many teammates reported them also? Report, report again I say report. Everyone for any instance REPORT.
  10. Mudd_H_F__XX

    Way to Many One Sided Battles Lately

    Every battle is one sided. Otherwise there would be many more draws. We have 2 teams in every battle 1 wins and the other loses. That will not change regardless of whatever may be attempted to change that. Play 20000 more and you will see the same thing. If WG ran a test using the top 24 so called BEST players and mixed and matched them in different ships one team then the other for 100 battles the result will be no different. One winner, one loser.
  11. True you don't get a target lock but with a rapid fire ship 10+ guns intentional hits are going to occur. The op's complaint is about such a ship and a malicious player.
  12. Agreed 100% there could be coastlines around the edges, perhaps all 4 edges with just one open gap in one edge. The entrance to the bay so to speak. Fewer and smaller island, unless the map represents an island chain and they are smaller, shorter and more in the center.
  13. Mudd_H_F__XX


    Yes they do. Prior to this there was no speed loss and a player could speed along the border with 1/2 the ship in play and 1/2 out of play. The speed reduction, audible and visual warning were added to discourage an deter border riding. It doesn't work very well. However no damage penalty is needed.
  14. Decades ago when I began playing naval combat games many were single player and the AI in a few was quite challenging. When I and a few friends began playing WoWs in 2015 most of our compus were barely capable of handling the game in random mode but did fine in co op. Fewer ships, less AA/torp action and such. Now it seems 5 years in that once I upgrade I am 1 step behind the game advances. My most recent 2019 upgrade still falls short. I suppose my next upgrade will have to be a compu not produced yet to get ahead of the game advances. There is also less toxicity in co op.