WG if you insist on having a +2/-2 Match Maker.

[Sovereigndawg]

Why are you so hooked on the +2/-2 match maker? My friends didn't quit playing at tier 4, They quit at tiers 5 and 6. Why don't you make 2 random battle modes for 1 month, a +1/-1 and a +2/-2 and see which one is used more? If the battle start times aren't bad you could keep them both. +2/-2 has an advantage of more potential points. +1/-1 has the advantage of far less frustration. If that works out you could consider a same tier mode. More modes is good! If you do this you can get rid of the tier 4 can't see tier 6 fiasco. People that want a +2/-2 mm still have it and people that would prefer a +1/-1 can have that too. Win, win! Easy Peasy! and smart besides.

or just get rid of the 4 can't see 6 meta.

[Lert]

1 minute ago, Sovereigndawg said:

More modes is good!

Not if it dilutes the playerbase.

Personally, I like the +/-2. It keeps me on my toes, it gives me matches where I feel like a monster swatting down flies, and it gives me matches where I feel like a hunter stalking down great prey. It keeps the game interesting, it keeps up the variation, keep things from going stale. But that's just me.

[TacticalOni]

1 hour ago, Lert said:

Not if it dilutes the playerbase.

Personally, I like the +/-2. It keeps me on my toes, it gives me matches where I feel like a monster swatting down flies, and it gives me matches where I feel like a hunter stalking down great prey. It keeps the game interesting, it keeps up the variation, keep things from going stale. But that's just me.

I can only agree, as much as I dislike being a Graf Spee in the presence of Bismarcks, it could be worse!
Kirishima (T5) vs. Washington (t8) being the first to mind. 

[Komrade_Rylo]

I like being uptiered. It makes the game somewhat challenging, something it quite often lacks in most regards. Not to mention the queue times would become unbearably long for tier 10 games.

[TornadoADV]

Until you get to Tier 8 and 80% of your games are bottom tier.

[TornadoADV]

1 minute ago, Fog_Battleship_NCarolina said:

I like being uptiered. It makes the game somewhat challenging, something it quite often lacks in most regards. Not to mention the queue times would become unbearably long for tier 10 games.

Good, Tier 10s should suffer some more. There needs to be a weighted preference to Battle Tier 11 and 12 where it's just 9s and 10s or just 10s so the 8s have some freaking breathing space.

[MaliceA4Thought]

I think the primary issue with all of this MM malarky is the fact that it is NOT consistent throughout the range.  Personally I prefer +/-2 (actually I really enjoyed the challenge of +/-4 but thats just me )  but across all tiers because then there is actually a challenge and with ships, theres NO ship in the game that can't perform at -2...theres quite a few players that can't but it's not the ships fault.

However I have no issue if the consensus is +/-1 even though I consider that pretty much participation trophy level of play.

I see it like this...

+/-1   Grade school sports day

+/-2   People who go on to play at a higher level

+/-3   Professional sports level

+/-4  Olympic Level   (and yes, we had this level in Alpha and it is the greatest feeling in the world when your Fuso puts the final hurt on a Yamato and sinks it :)  That's gold medal stuff.

However, the issue is not +/- xyz  it's consistency and the current break at T5 is taking people that have grown up in the kiddie pool and then giving them the higher level of competition which leads to dissatisfaction and encourages all the players that have grown up in easy mode to quit.

None of this is helped by devs who are responsible for balancing being people that openly declare they only play T10 but look at the stats....   Thats like working for a Boss who sits in an office right by the front door and doesn't listen to people who work there complaininng that they have to walk 20 minutes to the shop floor...  all he sees are the stats that show everyone turned up each day and refuses to hear the complaints and says..  nothing wrong here guv right upto the point when the workers get fed up and leave and then the boss sits there and says...  "what happened, there was nothing wrong".

Devs should get into the real world and play all levels and all scenarios when they are responsible for balance and overall good of the game.. stats is only half the issue...  the undercurrents are what will be decisive eventually.

I also believe that if we are going to continue with this split MM at T 5 then there should be an artificial T11 that sucks a load of the T10's and 9's out to play in their own matches to prevent the constant uptiering of lower tier ships into the top tier to make up numbers

I vote for consistency at either +/-1 OR +/-2 but not this kiddie pool to player pool rubbish we have now :)

M

 

[VTAdmiral]

All tiers should be treated the same.

 

Either all tiers including 3 and 4 should have +2/-2, or all tiers including tiers 5-6-7-8-9-10 should have +1/-1.

 

The current split is causing new players to quit when they hit the tier 5 wall and get fed to tier 7 game after game after game.

[DDJohnston]

3 minutes ago, Battlecruiser_RenownMkI said:

I can only agree, as much as I dislike being a Graf Spee in the presence of Bismarcks, it could be worse!
Kirishima (T5) vs. Washington (t8) being the first to mind. 

South Dakota (T8 Alabama) was there that night as well, and was getting beat on while Washington came around unspotted and smacked Kirishima with main battery and full 10 5"/38 broadside at 9000 yards.  South Dakota wasn't swatting Kirishima herself. She was having issues.  But, she did have Kirishima by the nose so Washington could kick her...

 

[TacticalOni]

1 hour ago, MaliceA4Thought said:

+/-4  Olympic Level   (and yes, we had this level in Alpha and it is the greatest feeling in the world when your Fuso puts the final hurt on a Yamato and sinks it :)  That's gold medal stuff.

MFW I brought a Warspite into tier 10 and did the last 20k damage to a Yamato to sink it back in CBT. 
Good times, those

[FayFay731]

Just now, TornadoADV said:

Until you get to Tier 8 and 80% of your games are bottom tier.

If all the T8s are in T10 matches and all the T6s are in T8 matches, wait... See there's no point complaining about the +2/-2 MM then, some games you're top, some you aren't. I think people are exaggerating that their are always being bottom tier and disregarding the times when they are top tier.

[VTAdmiral]

2 minutes ago, FayFay731 said:

If all the T8s are in T10 matches and all the T6s are in T8 matches, wait... See there's no point complaining about the +2/-2 MM then, some games you're top, some you aren't. I think people are exaggerating that their are always being bottom tier and disregarding the times when they are top tier.

it's not really an exaggeration. Hundreds of games were catalogued during Lert's thread which came out to ~65% of the games being spent bottom tier vs T7 in a T5 ship.

 

That's significant.

[Sovereigndawg]

9 minutes ago, Lert said:

Not if it dilutes the playerbase.

Personally, I like the +/-2. It keeps me on my toes, it gives me matches where I feel like a monster swatting down flies, and it gives me matches where I feel like a hunter stalking down great prey. It keeps the game interesting, it keeps up the variation, keep things from going stale. But that's just me.

 

5 minutes ago, Battlecruiser_RenownMkI said:

I can only agree, as much as I dislike being a Graf Spee in the presence of Bismarcks, it could be worse!
Kirishima (T5) vs. Washington (t8) being the first to mind. 

 

4 minutes ago, Fog_Battleship_NCarolina said:

I like being uptiered. It makes the game somewhat challenging, something it quite often lacks in most regards. Not to mention the queue times would become unbearably long for tier 10 games.

I would probably play mostly +2/-2 also but as far as player base goes we lost 4 players this week that only started playing about a month ago. That is just my friends I am sure there is more.

[Sovereigndawg]

4 minutes ago, Battlecruiser_RenownMkI said:

MFW I brought a Warspite into tier 10 and did the last 20k damage to a Yamato to sink it back in CBT. 
Good times, those

I sank a tier 10 BB with a derzki before they changed the division rules. I am in no way saying you can't do good with an uptiered ship. It's just losing players because of frustration that I am concerned with.

[RobertViktor68]

more tier 1 vs tier 3!

[Lert]

9 minutes ago, AraAragami said:

Hundreds of games were catalogued during Lert's thread which came out to ~65% of the games being spent bottom tier vs T7 in a T5 ship.

You misremember.

[MaliceA4Thought]

4 minutes ago, Sovereigndawg said:

 

 

I would probably play mostly +2/-2 also but as far as player base goes we lost 4 players this week that only started playing about a month ago. That is just my friends I am sure there is more.

BUt if your friends had been exposed to +/-2 from day 1, then the shock after a few months wouldn't have happened to make them leave and they would have developed the skills needed to survive at -2.  In addition, there would be more games where they were middle or top tier as opposed to jumping into T5 and being low tier more often than high tier.

As I said, it's lack of consistency that gets you EVERY time and thats what looses the players when they get to T5 (or a couple of months into the game).

M

[Parliament_Funkadelic]

Only thing I wish they would even out is radar. Have had a few matches were the reds have 3 or 4 radars to none and an extra dd.

[Sovereigndawg]

12 hours ago, MaliceA4Thought said:

BUt if your friends had been exposed to +/-2 from day 1, then the shock after a few months wouldn't have happened to make them leave and they would have developed the skills needed to survive at -2.  In addition, there would be more games where they were middle or top tier as opposed to jumping into T5 and being low tier more often than high tier.

As I said, it's lack of consistency that gets you EVERY time and thats what looses the players when they get to T5 (or a couple of months into the game).

M

Yes I should have and will add; or just get rid of the 4 can't see 6 meta to the original post.

[Elo_J_Fudpucker]

17 minutes ago, TornadoADV said:

Until you get to Tier 8 and 80% of your games are bottom tier.

This is my gripe... T8 almost anything in T10 is near useless... you can do some damage, but it is frequently the case that you are out-ranged, out-spotted and out gunned with little to no chance of doing well. 

Perhaps the compromise is to +-1 at tiers 8 & 9??

I find the +2 T8 battles to be not fun and until lately. I haven't played a lot of T8 because of the lopsidedness of the +2 battles.. SL is coming so I have stepped back in for the sake of practice... 

[VTAdmiral]

7 minutes ago, Lert said:

You misremember.

I'm accounting for everyone's submitted games, not just yours. It wound up being a bit higher than your ~50%, which is still significant.

[Elo_J_Fudpucker]

9 minutes ago, Lert said:

You misremember.

This is true for the lower tiers, but T10 only has lower tiers to pick from, therefore they are always top tier and anyone they play with is bottom tier... So the odds of facing +1 and +2 in a T8 go way up because otherwise T9 and T10 wouldn't have enough players to fill the games... 

 

 

[MaliceA4Thought]

2 minutes ago, Elo_J_Fudpucker said:

This is my gripe... T8 almost anything in T10 is near useless... you can do some damage, but it is frequently the case that you are out-ranged, out-spotted and out gunned with little to no chance of doing well. 
 

I absolutely and totally disagree with that statement, but I respect your feelings on that :)  (I am not having a go at you I just disagree)

A lot of my best games are in T8 ships in a T10 game in all classes  (well except CV's  never got the hang of them).. BUT  I have to be playing well and it's draining to be doing it a lot of the time.. if it was FAIR  and 33.3% of my games were top,  33.3% were mid and 33.3% of my games were bottom...(like it used to be) THEN it would be FAIR and it would be more enjoyable.

M

[Kapitan_Wuff]

I also like the +2/-2. I have zero complaints on that. Most ships can handle being down tiered and the extra rewards are nice, plus you have equal chances to be top tier which can also be fun. 

I do not however like the protected MM of the lower tiers, mess up mid range MM too much.

 

@Sovereigndawg, I believe if your friends had not been lulled by protected MM and then thrown into the hell of t5/6 created by that same protected MM they may have stuck around. 

WG claims their protected MM is to keep new players but I believe it actually cause more harm than good.

[Sakuzhi]

40 minutes ago, Lert said:

Not if it dilutes the playerbase.

Personally, I like the +/-2. It keeps me on my toes, it gives me matches where I feel like a monster swatting down flies, and it gives me matches where I feel like a hunter stalking down great prey. It keeps the game interesting, it keeps up the variation, keep things from going stale. But that's just me.

Yes...but, they'll likely need to consider a CV +/-1, given the general uselessness of a CV when it's at +2 Tier and a generally rofl OP of it being -2 tier.