Fail Divisions

[Seadog_Supreme]

If you put 2 different tiers in your division, only the top tier is considered and the bottom tier can end up 3 tiers down from the top. 8 & 9 or 9 & 10 this can't happen. You should consider this before making up your division. Here's what my green team got last night: Tirpitz, Sharnhorst, and Colorado in a tier 10 battle. Not good! Naturally they were all matched with tier 8. I have seen a 4 & 5 division in a tier 7 battle, which was even worse for the tier 4 ship, which was Myogi. With the MM set like this, I want all the same tier in my division unless it's tier 8+. And pray to RNGesus that I don't see another fail division on my side.

[SgtBeltfed]

Problem is, they think they're exploiting the MM, until a Langley sees an Atlanta or Cleveland

[Stauffenberg44]

It's almost as though some of them believe that 3 losers in a division will create a magical synergy and boost their respective WRs--actually it's the reverse. Some divisions, as soon as you see them, you know your team is handicapped.

[Reymu]

Fail divs remain allowed.

 

If bottom tier were considered, know how many people could div 2 T5s with a T4 for a guaranteed T4-5? That could easily get out of hand.

[BB3_Oregon_Steel]

I think this is an idiotic subject. Players should be allowed to play the ships they want to play within the structure allowed by the game without enduring the grief that people throw at them.  You fight the ship you have and even when you are uptiered, your job is to figure out how to take the tools you have and make them effective for the battle you are in.  

And don't kid yourself into believing that uptiered ships can't be fought well in a higher tier match.  It's more of a challenge than normal when that happens, but isn't that why we play the game, to see what we can do with these ships?  I mean, real life didn't have a matchmaking problem.  The German Pre-Dreadnoughts at Jultand (Tier 2 in WOWS) didn't complain when they were engaging the most advanced and powerful dreadnoughts in the world (Queen Elizabeth class - T6).  

On the other hand I have seen players complain so much about the "fail division" on their team that they themselves lose track of what they should be doing and do stupid things with their own ship.

Here's the thing, it is not so much the ship you are driving which determines success or failure, it's what you do with that ship that counts.  

[Kevik70]

I will say that it is entertaining to see Colorados in a tier 10 match. 

[457th_FighterGroup]

Is it possible to put an Erie into a T10 match?

[ZoomieG]

6 minutes ago, Reymu said:

If bottom tier were considered, know how many people could div 2 T5s with a T4 for a guaranteed T4-5? That could easily get out of hand.

So, T5s in a T5 level match is not only a problem, but a problem that could 'get out of hand'?  How is it any different than queuing up in a T4, and getting two T5s on your team?

Fail-divs only exist because the algorithm MM uses is brain-dead.  If WG had any interest in programming a MM that was worth anything, not only would it dial back +2 up-tiering during high server populations (which it apparently doesn't), but it would match divisions based on their MM spread, and not just the highest level in the div.

3 minutes ago, BB3_Oregon_Steel said:

And don't kid yourself into believing that uptiered ships can't be fought well in a higher tier match. 

Here's the thing, it is not so much the ship you are driving which determines success or failure, it's what you do with that ship that counts.  

When I see a fail-div, I know that the members of that div don't know enough about MM rules to prevent making stupid div combos.  This leads me to believe they may not be very knowledgeable about other facets of the game, such as angling, ammo choice, torp ranges, and playing objectives.  The judgment tends to hold up.

[Vekta408]

It's even worse when it's a division of 3 T-22 and they have no idea what they're doing. You wanna talk about fail divisions...

 

Now THAT...is a fail division. I liked the Emile grind but seeing those on both side back and forth makes me glad I'm onto the T7-8 grind now. I see that nonsense a lot less.

[Slntreaper]

Lowest tier?  I could play a tier 10, div with a tier 1, and get into a tier 1 game.  My enemies wouldn't stand a chance.

[ZoomieG]

7 minutes ago, Slntreaper said:

Lowest tier?  I could play a tier 10, div with a tier 1, and get into a tier 1 game.  My enemies wouldn't stand a chance.

Pretty sure you can't.  While extreme div spreads used to be possible, at least the game no longer lets you div outside of MM spread, AFAIK.

Edit: As of patch 0.5.10, divisions are restricted to a one tier spread. - Wows Wiki

[Cognitive_Dissonance]

19 minutes ago, BB3_Oregon_Steel said:

I think this is an idiotic subject. Players should be allowed to play the ships they want to play within the structure allowed by the game without enduring the grief that people throw at them.  You fight the ship you have and even when you are uptiered, your job is to figure out how to take the tools you have and make them effective for the battle you are in.  

And don't kid yourself into believing that uptiered ships can't be fought well in a higher tier match.  It's more of a challenge than normal when that happens, but isn't that why we play the game, to see what we can do with these ships?  I mean, real life didn't have a matchmaking problem.  The German Pre-Dreadnoughts at Jultand (Tier 2 in WOWS) didn't complain when they were engaging the most advanced and powerful dreadnoughts in the world (Queen Elizabeth class - T6).  

On the other hand I have seen players complain so much about the "fail division" on their team that they themselves lose track of what they should be doing and do stupid things with their own ship.

Here's the thing, it is not so much the ship you are driving which determines success or failure, it's what you do with that ship that counts.  

Comparing real life battles to this game is basically - a fail div.

The tiering in this game, which is explained and quite a bit of time and energy devoted to it's creation, was specifically created for MM and for balanced games.

Meaning, when you drag a ship by fail div into a fight where it is seeing tiers it would never see on it's own, you are affecting your team in a negative way.

[GrimmeReaper]

Way to fix it is the MM looks at the lower tier ship if it is a 4, nothing more than a T6.  I have been in the Belfast and been in a game with T10s.  Personally doesn't bother me, I look at it as being able to farrm experience.  Spamming HE at GFKs and Yammys from behind Islands and smoke is fine with me.

[Spud_butt]

I can't relate to this thread as I have never been in a fail division. so I won't post in it.

[Psycodiver]

The Umikaze was pretty op in T10 matches and that was only a T2

[Crucis]

45 minutes ago, BB3_Oregon_Steel said:

I think this is an idiotic subject. Players should be allowed to play the ships they want to play within the structure allowed by the game without enduring the grief that people throw at them.  You fight the ship you have and even when you are uptiered, your job is to figure out how to take the tools you have and make them effective for the battle you are in.  

And don't kid yourself into believing that uptiered ships can't be fought well in a higher tier match.  It's more of a challenge than normal when that happens, but isn't that why we play the game, to see what we can do with these ships?  I mean, real life didn't have a matchmaking problem.  The German Pre-Dreadnoughts at Jultand (Tier 2 in WOWS) didn't complain when they were engaging the most advanced and powerful dreadnoughts in the world (Queen Elizabeth class - T6).  

On the other hand I have seen players complain so much about the "fail division" on their team that they themselves lose track of what they should be doing and do stupid things with their own ship.

Here's the thing, it is not so much the ship you are driving which determines success or failure, it's what you do with that ship that counts.  

The thing is that some people would like to see "the structure allowed by the game" changed to get rid of fail divisions.  And ya know something, I don't give a flip is people want to complain about fail divisions.  Good for them.  Maybe if enough people complain about it, the devs will finally get rid of them entirely.

[Reymu]

1 hour ago, ZoomieG said:

So, T5s in a T5 level match is not only a problem, but a problem that could 'get out of hand'?  How is it any different than queuing up in a T4, and getting two T5s on your team?

Fail-divs only exist because the algorithm MM uses is brain-dead.  If WG had any interest in programming a MM that was worth anything, not only would it dial back +2 up-tiering during high server populations (which it apparently doesn't), but it would match divisions based on their MM spread, and not just the highest level in the div.

Think. T5 has a way to avoid getting uptiered to 7s like it often is.

 

What tier has to be brought uptier then? T6.

 

Restoring the +/-2 MM to T4 is not a bad idea. Either way, players who can't stand being uptiered a lot will simply leave, and it's not like they'll enjoy it in T8 any more than at T4.

[AnatolyDyatlovDidNothing]

1 hour ago, 457th_FighterGroup said:

Is it possible to put an Erie into a T10 match?

 

Not anymore, but it used to be

[BB3_Oregon_Steel]

4 hours ago, ZoomieG said:

So, T5s in a T5 level match is not only a problem, but a problem that could 'get out of hand'?  How is it any different than queuing up in a T4, and getting two T5s on your team?

Fail-divs only exist because the algorithm MM uses is brain-dead.  If WG had any interest in programming a MM that was worth anything, not only would it dial back +2 up-tiering during high server populations (which it apparently doesn't), but it would match divisions based on their MM spread, and not just the highest level in the div.

When I see a fail-div, I know that the members of that div don't know enough about MM rules to prevent making stupid div combos.  This leads me to believe they may not be very knowledgeable about other facets of the game, such as angling, ammo choice, torp ranges, and playing objectives.  The judgment tends to hold up.

Well, what I see is that I have nearly 3,600 games so when you see me in an uptiered ship, you would be wrong.  What you are doing is making the mistake of believing that everyone thinks the way you do and that the way you see things is the only valid way of seeing things. 

Here's a clue.  Not everyone in WOWS is as obsessed about their stats or how to make wins easier to achieve.  There are a lot of other players who see WOWS as a game which allows them to test their skills using historic ships in what it a largely "what if" semi-simulation.  These players largely could care less about the matchmaker that so many others whine about.  After all, rl sailors didn't have someone to complain to when their lower tiered ship ended up in real combat with a higher tiered ship.

In the end, the real question is can you fight your ship well enough to defeat the enemy rather than "omg, the matchmaker is like sooooo unfair and those fail div peoples are, like totally messing up my game." 

Suck it up buttercup and fight your ships.

[BB3_Oregon_Steel]

4 hours ago, Crucis said:

The thing is that some people would like to see "the structure allowed by the game" changed to get rid of fail divisions.  And ya know something, I don't give a flip is people want to complain about fail divisions.  Good for them.  Maybe if enough people complain about it, the devs will finally get rid of them entirely.

Well, personally I don't see anything wrong with the way it is, but if they change it then they'll change it.  Until then concentrate more on fighting your own ships rather than going after players who aren't, in your opinion, playing the "right ship" .

[Spud_butt]

6 minutes ago, BB3_Oregon_Steel said:

Well, what I see is that I have nearly 3,600 games so when you see me in an uptiered ship, you would be wrong.  What you are doing is making the mistake of believing that everyone thinks the way you do and that the way you see things is the only valid way of seeing things. 

Here's a clue.  Not everyone in WOWS is as obsessed about their stats or how to make wins easier to achieve.  There are a lot of other players who see WOWS as a game which allows them to test their skills using historic ships in what it a largely "what if" semi-simulation.  These players largely could care less about the matchmaker that so many others whine about.  After all, rl sailors didn't have someone to complain to when their lower tiered ship ended up in real combat with a higher tiered ship.

In the end, the real question is can you fight your ship well enough to defeat the enemy rather than "omg, the matchmaker is like sooooo unfair and those fail div peoples are, like totally messing up my game." 

Suck it up buttercup and fight your ships.

you too are making the mistake of thinking everyone thinks the way you do, and the way you see it is the only valid way of seeing things.

I like testing my skills to see if I can score high on the stats, and yet still be on losing teams over 60% of the time. which would indicate [edited] up MM crap is a real thing.

so suck it up buttercup and stop trying to ram your crap down everybody else's throats

[ZoomieG]

3 hours ago, Reymu said:

Think. T5 has a way to avoid getting uptiered to 7s like it often is.

What tier has to be brought uptier then? T6.

Is that really a problem worth considering?  They'd still be playing in their design match spread.  Frankly, having T4s in a T7 match is a worse problem than giving T5s a way to not be in a T7 match.  Why do you think T5s should play at T7 in the majority of their matches?  T6 also already plays in T7 (or T8) most of the time, so no change there. 

[BB3_Oregon_Steel]

8 minutes ago, not_acceptable said:

you too are making the mistake of thinking everyone thinks the way you do, and the way you see it is the only valid way of seeing things.

I like testing my skills to see if I can score high on the stats, and yet still be on losing teams over 60% of the time. which would indicate [edited] up MM crap is a real thing.

so suck it up buttercup and stop trying to ram your crap down everybody else's throats

Nice catch, but I don't think everyone see things the way I do.  Simply look at this thread and you'd have to be blind not to see others see this game in a different light.  

And I do suck it up.  I don't try to blame other players and their ship choices for winning the game or losing it for me.  I don't complain about the matchmaker as the reason I lose.  I fight my ships with what I have against whatever is in front of me.  That's sucking it up.

What's going on in this thread is sort of the opposite of sucking it up, just in case you were confused. 

So, start sucking it up buttercup.

 

[Spud_butt]

3 minutes ago, BB3_Oregon_Steel said:

Nice catch, but I don't think everyone see things the way I do.  Simply look at this thread and you'd have to be blind not to see others see this game in a different light.  

And I do suck it up.  I don't try to blame other players and their ship choices for winning the game or losing it for me.  I don't complain about the matchmaker as the reason I lose.  I fight my ships with what I have against whatever is in front of me.  That's sucking it up.

What's going on in this thread is sort of the opposite of sucking it, just in case you were confused. 

So, start sucking it up buttercup.

 

I've never told anybody to suck it up buttercup, because it's really stupid.

[Crucis]

14 minutes ago, BB3_Oregon_Steel said:

Well, personally I don't see anything wrong with the way it is, but if they change it then they'll change it.  Until then concentrate more on fighting your own ships rather than going after players who aren't, in your opinion, playing the "right ship" .

Sorry, but I'll never say a bad word about anyone who rags on people who do fail divisions.  Never.  Fail divisions are wrong.  And people who bring a fail division to a team are being selfish.