Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
EasternSun

Onesides Win/Losses are not caused by MM. It's the Maps and Spawn location

52 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

_V12    497
1 hour ago, nuttybiscuit said:

You seem to be developing an obsession with me, if your only reason for commenting in this thread is to make, offtopic, personal insults, evidently derived from a sense of inadequacy of some kind:Smile_glasses:. It is an unhealthy mind that follows commentators across forum threads for this singular purpose.

Fair winds and calm seas Captain.

 

I should preface this by informing you I'm in a very foul mood following being DDOS'd during SL finals.

 

Filling a post with unfounded condescension isn't forgotten by ending it with "fair winds".  

 

Anyways, it's just a public service.  The amount of everyone's time you wasted in the other thread, that could have been avoided with you possessing a few more IQ points, probably would have been enough to cure cancer.  I'm simply ensuring that doesn't happen again.  Git gud and read more before you try to talk game mechanics.  Until then I may as well listen to my dog talk about HE bombs.  She is more likely to come to a correct conclusion than your clown [edited].

 

Taichunger feeds on stupidity without realizing it sometimes, so I chose to clue him in.

Edited by _V12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IronWolfV    6,626
12 hours ago, OstwindFlakpanzer said:

wins and losses are caused because WG doesn't do anything to control the population of shitlords - like sending them to play with bots when they can't break 40% winrate

 

Great idea to bleed even more players and kill this game that much faster.

 

BRILLIANT!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IronWolfV    6,626
59 minutes ago, Jakob_Knight said:

Hmmm....steamrolled teams.  Can't -possibly- be because of the actions of the players.  :cap_old:

Noooo..... Couldn't be!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nuttybiscuit    576
40 minutes ago, _V12 said:

I should preface this by informing you I'm in a very foul mood following being DDOS'd during SL finals.

I am sorry to hear this. That is one topic, anyway, on which I will neither comment nor contest your knowledge about. :Smile_honoring:

40 minutes ago, _V12 said:

Filling a post with unfounded condescension isn't forgotten by ending it with "fair winds".  

I don't go about calling people "morons" or derailing other people's topics with personal issues.

40 minutes ago, _V12 said:

Git gud and read more before you try to talk game mechanics.

On game mechanics, I am infamously creative with my understanding. On the subject of Git Gud, I am sure you agree, evidence of understanding a subject is enhanced with experience of the same. Which is where and why we differed on the topic of Graf Zeppelin, you have played it ONCE, I have played it in nearly 300 battles.

On the topic of general expertise on the game, with other ships, hats off to you for playing so well and skillfully. So Git Gud with Graf Zep, so at least we can try to have an amical conversation based upon shared experience (hopefully on opposing teams, so you can demonstrate your gameplay skills too)!

See you on the battlefield Captain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
_V12    497
32 minutes ago, nuttybiscuit said:

I am sorry to hear this. That is one topic, anyway, on which I will neither comment nor contest your knowledge about. :Smile_honoring:

 

It's put quite a damper on my weekend.

 

Quote

I don't go about calling people "morons" or derailing other people's topics with personal issues.

 

I responded to a derail of a derail, if we're fair.  This topic was pretty DOA anyways, I doubt anyone's feelings are hurt.

 

Quote

On game mechanics, I am infamously creative with my understanding. On the subject of Git Gud, I am sure you agree, evidence of undestanding a subject is enhanced with experience of the same. Which is where and why we differed on the topic of Graf Zeppelin, you have played it ONCE, I have played it in nearly 300 battles.

On the topic of general expertise on the game, with other ships, hats off to you for playing so well and skillfully. So Git Gud with Graf Zep, so at least we can try to have an amical conversation based upon shared experience (hopefully on opposing teams, so you can demonstrate your gameplay skills too)!

See you on the battlefield Captain.

 

 

I have more than that number of public battles while evaluating revised Graf Zeppelin Test ships, and many hours into writing responses, after recognizing I was one of the few (if not only) people testing the ship with comp experience in CVs.  I take the testing very seriously (read: do a lot of it), so rest assured I am playing the ship in some capacity while trying to ensure it isn't hamstrung in a way only pros would catch.  'Till that's over I won't be playing original GZ, because it's worse, and why learn a ship that is going to disappear soon?  Time better spent getting gud at Moskva for CW or acquiring Hindy for the same reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nuttybiscuit    576
2 minutes ago, _V12 said:

I have more than that number of public battles while evaluating revised Graf Zeppelin Test ships

we can all say similar, but we can only take it on your word alone.

4 minutes ago, _V12 said:

why learn a ship that is going to disappear soon?

It has been here for 3 months, it won't disappear overnight. Who knows how long it will take before changes to GZ are finalized? But as with all premiums, they are subjected to direct and indirect changes over time (see Giulio Cesare torpedo belt buff on PTS, for example), which can prove to be nerfs or improvements. All ships have to be releartn after a certain while, to adapt to a changing game.

3 minutes ago, _V12 said:

 'Till that's over I won't be playing original GZ, because it's worse

as you have only played it in one battle (admittedly which you lost), your assessment lacks credibility.

7 minutes ago, _V12 said:

Time better spent getting gud at Moskva for CW or acquiring Hindy for the same reason.

Which is one reason why we have premium ships, to earn the credits for our costly t10s!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
_V12    497
7 minutes ago, nuttybiscuit said:

It has been here for 3 months, it won't disappear overnight. Who knows how long it will take before changes to GZ are finalized?

 

They announced this is likely the final round, with one more possible, of test ships and that the release will be rapidly afterwards.

 

Quote

But as with all premiums, they are subjected to direct and indirect changes over time (see Giulio Cesare torpedo belt buff on PTS, for example), which can prove to be nerfs or improvements. All ships have to be releartn after a certain while, to adapt to a changing game.

 

Given the likelihood of a complete overhaul, rendering the GZ-specific skills that would have been developed, useless, I'm not losing sleep.  The bomb timer is all but guaranteed to disappear or be irrelevantly short.  Fighter tactics are no different than traditional IJN CV ones, that is if the fighters remain as two 5-squads (which I highly suspect it will).  

 

Quote

as you have only played it in one battle (admittedly which you lost), your assessment lacks credibility.

 

Several versions have been identical to original GZ, but with buffed plane stats.  Objectively, they were better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nuttybiscuit    576
4 minutes ago, _V12 said:

that is if the fighters remain as two 5-squads (which I highly suspect it will).  

I hope so, I hate the nerf to scouting and pegging potential with only one fighter squadron. A waste of the "fastest" fighters characteristic, a clear nerf of tactical flexibility too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Taichunger said:

Of course, the experience of one counterexample completely refutes a general trend. This is why statistics and research are useless, and nobody bothers to accumulate data. Thanks! 

 

12 hours ago, nuttybiscuit said:

offer statistics to prove your argument that cvs decide battles more than other factors, inc dds.

 

More data/examples... ‘common sense’ says an AS Bogue will always beat a Zuiho, and yet more times than I can count, I have seen AS Bogues shut an enemy down, then lose the battle, because they couldn’t project effective damage or protect themselves. They shut the other CV down, but are effectively useless at that point as well if the pew-pews on the opposite team play well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nuttybiscuit    576
10 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

 

 

More data/examples... ‘common sense’ says an AS Bogue will always beat a Zuiho, and yet more times than I can count, I have seen AS Bogues shut an enemy down, then lose the battle, because they couldn’t project effective damage or protect themselves. They shut the other CV down, but are effectively useless at that point as well if the pew-pews on the opposite team play well.

This sounds like my Taiho strike vs Fara's Essex fighters, he shut me down, 100%, very quickly. His team still lost the battle, while he must be indisputably, a much better cv player than I..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
_V12    497
1 hour ago, nuttybiscuit said:

I hope so, I hate the nerf to scouting and pegging potential with only one fighter squadron. A waste of the "fastest" fighters characteristic, a clear nerf of tactical flexibility too.

 

On the contrary, the single fighter squadron is broken beyond belief.  I have been shutting down Enterprise, AS Lex, and AS Shoukaku like nobody's business with it.  Other fighters can't compete, whereas before GZ couldn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Slimeball91    116
3 hours ago, Jakob_Knight said:

Hmmm....steamrolled teams.  Can't -possibly- be because of the actions of the players.  :cap_old:

People are very predictable, making desired outcomes easier to achieve.  You go to the grocery store and everything is arranged to make you spend the most money.  You only need milk, but because you had to walk through the entire store to get to the milk you ended up grabbing some cookies, and the cheese you like that was on "sale".

Don't for one second think WG doesn't carefully analyze data of spawn location/map design for the purposes of achieving desired outcomes.  We can argue what those outcomes are or should be, but not that they are manipulated.       

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nuttybiscuit    576
50 minutes ago, _V12 said:

 

On the contrary, the single fighter squadron is broken beyond belief.  I have been shutting down Enterprise, AS Lex, and AS Shoukaku like nobody's business with it.  Other fighters can't compete, whereas before GZ couldn't.

Well, if only for different reasons, we agree on this, 2 squadrons are more desirable than one. (though we can keep disagreeing to keep up appearances!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
_V12    497
22 minutes ago, nuttybiscuit said:

Well, if only for different reasons, we agree on this, 2 squadrons are more desirable than one. (though we can keep disagreeing to keep up appearances!)

Absolutely not the case.  The double fighter squads were useful for marginal scouting only.  The new single squad can take on an entire CV's loadout at once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nuttybiscuit    576
10 minutes ago, _V12 said:

Absolutely not the case.  The double fighter squads were useful for marginal scouting only.  The new single squad can take on an entire CV's loadout at once.

marginal scouting? The fastest fighter/scouts of their tier? They are superb scouts, because of their speed, able to reveal the map in one early game sweep, identify dds and efficiently peg them. When threatened by superior fighter formations, they can out run anything at that tier (which is how I beat many an Enterprise captain with GZ vanilla). Admittedly, scout, run and strike playstyle will not suit everyone's tastes in CV play. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
_V12    497
14 minutes ago, nuttybiscuit said:

marginal scouting? The fastest fighter/scouts of their tier? They are superb scouts, because of their speed, able to reveal the map in one early game sweep, identify dds and efficiently peg them. When threatened by superior fighter formations, they can out run anything at that tier (which is how I beat many an Enterprise captain with GZ vanilla). Admittedly, scout, run and strike playstyle will not suit everyone's tastes in CV play. 

 

Incapability of properly contesting enemy strikes, and inability to ensure your own get through, is more what I was getting at.  Relying on randoms to hit targets you spot is an optimistic outlook on the game's average player.  They are marginap scouts because they have the lowest health of any fighter, and are slower and have much less health compared to empty IJN and USN dive bombers.  On a level of play where that kind of scouting is truly relevant, DDs are carrying AA, and GZ fighters drop like flies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nuttybiscuit    576
55 minutes ago, _V12 said:

 

Incapability of properly contesting enemy strikes, and inability to ensure your own get through, is more what I was getting at.  Relying on randoms to hit targets you spot is an optimistic outlook on the game's average player.  They are marginap scouts because they have the lowest health of any fighter, and are slower and have much less health compared to empty IJN and USN dive bombers.  On a level of play where that kind of scouting is truly relevant, DDs are carrying AA, and GZ fighters drop like flies.

really? 

55 minutes ago, _V12 said:

Incapability of properly contesting enemy strikes

With the fastest fighters of their tier, the GZ has no trouble intercepting enemy strike formations. (Or shouldn't have)

55 minutes ago, _V12 said:

inability to ensure your own get through,

you know how to bait and switch? Bluff, make it part of your CV game. 

55 minutes ago, _V12 said:

They are marginap scouts because they have the lowest health of any fighter, and are slower and have much less health compared to empty IJN and USN dive bombers.

this is pure invention of yours. The GZ fighters are the fastest planes of their tier, full stop. What does their health matter if they cannot be caught? Or are you confusing the Stuka dive bombers with fighters? That might explain some of your difficulties when playing CVs. Amateur noob tip : don't send bombers to intercept fighters.

(but, chasing empty strike aircraft for any length of time is a mugs game, get your initial interception right in the first place, if you are chasing empty planes, you have made a tacitcal mistake elsewhere, anyway - it happens to us all)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maps and spawn locations do have an effects, but not nearly as strong an effect as players that make a BAD decision at the beginning of a match.  One poster (about 3rd 4th post in) noted that effect.  I call it the Cattle herd..A big issue with it is aversion to risk..The number one issue which any military or ex military will tell you is player not seeing their ship as an "expendable asset".  The problem isn't the maps or the MM, it's player mindset.  The games scoring system also contributes mightily to this.  It encourages a particular mind set that focuses more on individual performance (scoring) as opposed to team performance (winning)  Counter to this is things like Supremacy league where play is the entire opposite of this.  Team performance is all that matters because there is NO player scoring.  Something I wish had been incorporated into Clan Battles.. no personal score.. only team score.. ah well.

 

The problem is not any one thing.  It's how the synergies between play, how players are rewarded and what they are rewarded for.   WG could make a game like this, and it HAS been done.. The problem is such games tend to die fairly quickly because they do not tie into the cultural meem of computer gaming in general.  PvP games are rarely if ever "Team Goal" only reward based.  If your payout in a match were totally dependent on how well the team does game play in Warships would be radically different.   If I play Supremacy league style in a typical random battle I can and will contrubute heavily toward my teams win of the match.. how ever, I tend to score low low low in such matches (I drive  DD).. I've had many a match where Is cored less then 4k of damage, no torpedo hits to speak off, and a lot of running all over the dickens putting torps across the bow of threats and making sure they stay cautious.  Nothing like working yer butt of for 20 min to bag a win and finding yourself dead last for score.  

 

Change the games payouts.  Loosing earns even less, winning earns more.  That will do more to encourage skilled thoughtful play then all the MM and map and spawn point changes you care to make.  And bring back "Draw" games where no one clearly won.    (both sides get "looser" payouts...encourage them to try harder!)

 

Roll over matches happen when one side is either too aggressive, or insufficiently aggressive.   Motly they happen because one teams players choose to "Play it Safe"   and refuses to fight, and by the time they finally do start to actually fight it's way to late because they've no cap control or critical ships have been sunk.  Because players do not understand the concept of combined arms, systems synergies,.and GROUP tactics.   It's painful going into ranked battles after a season of SL play because you can see teams loosing a match the moment they drive off their spawn points nilly willy diving for cover instead of shooting/attacking/providing mutual cover and driving for the caps and victory.

 

There is no blame to be put on WG.  This is the sort of game the public as a whole wants and like any business they're providing a service, giving the customer what they want so the customer will give them money.   Go look at ANY top tier MMO's and you'll see the same thing.  Reward systems the promote Individual performance over "Team" or Group" performance.

 

  It's The Way Things Are Done.  I'd like better, but then I like competitive team sports and gaming.  Yea, well good luck to me right?    Most (as in the VAST MAJORITY) do not.  They don't want to depend on other players doing well to get their reward because you know.. "it's not fair!"  And because of that we have the very typical type of reward/payout system that Warships, and Tanks, and Warplanes have.. that with a few tweeks here and there is pretty much the same for every MMO out there.  Even World Of Warcraft has to deal with this.. and with in the player base its all about  "what your gear level, how are you specced.  You Must meet these standards or you don't get to raid/battleground/instance with us."

 

I've all ready seen clans in warships that will not accept players with "low" stats.  Because you know, they're not that good.    I got a guy I know has a 72% win rate in DD's, but his damage values are low so his WTR is like 700  (ie: Plays Poorly) but 3 out of ever 4 battles he's in he's on the winning side.   And no I am not going to tell you whom it is.. it's my secret, I'm keeping him!  Because his WTR my stink but she's (and it is a she) is one of the very best DD driving "TEAM" players in this game.  And she's not as rare as you might think.

 

So.  It's not a small issue, but I suspect it's one we have to live with, because the correction would best be served by changing the games system of payouts and rewards.  How ever those changes would not be accepted by the public  (or at least a very vocal minority or the public.. perception is EVERYTHING!  Don't believe me?  Ask EA about SW:BF-II and loot boxes!  Sometimes that minority how ever is right)  So corrective changes that would work would so fundementally change the game that it's popularity would take a massive nose dive.  

 

So expect the status quo to continue.. little itty bitty tweeks behind the curtain that aren't all that noticeable unless your looking at the results of hundreds of matches.   Something we players as rule do not do.  And data we don't have access to.  Enjoy what ya got, because it will never ever ever be perfect.  The reality of it is ,is it'll never even get close.  

 

TL_Warlord_Roff sends.

 

P.S. yea.. a lot of verbage.  Save your TL:DR's  because if you really want to learn about this stuff then your going to have to look a hella lot deeper into the rabbit hole to figure it out, and just like Alice, when you emerge from that rabbit hole you will be fundamentaly changed

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Raptor_alcor    1,457
16 hours ago, OstwindFlakpanzer said:

wins and losses are caused because WG doesn't do anything to control the population of shitlords - like sending them to play with bots when they can't break 40% winrate

 

Kindly think of a method of punishing the stupid that doesn't involve punishing those that play co-op for fun. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
_V12    497
1 hour ago, nuttybiscuit said:

really? 

With the fastest fighters of their tier, the GZ has no trouble intercepting enemy strike formations. (Or shouldn't have)

 

They get slaughtered by enemy fighters protecting said formation.

 

Quote

you know how to bait and switch? Bluff, make it part of your CV game. 

 

I have 70s-80s winrates and unicum avg damage playing strike US CVs, I'm aware of how to operate under ineffective fighter cover :Smile_great:

 

Quote

this is pure invention of yours. The GZ fighters are the fastest planes of their tier, full stop.

 

They are not faster than empty dive bombers.  This is easily shown in training room.  

 

Quote

What does their health matter if they cannot be caught? Or are you confusing the Stuka dive bombers with fighters? That might explain some of your difficulties when playing CVs. Amateur noob tip : don't send bombers to intercept fighters.

(but, chasing empty strike aircraft for any length of time is a mugs game, get your initial interception right in the first place, if you are chasing empty planes, you have made a tacitcal mistake elsewhere, anyway - it happens to us all)

 

I'm not sure if you are poorly interpreting my posts or something else, but....  AA is why their health matters.  High-health planes resist AA exponentially better.  Every 25% difference in health (say, 2000 versus 2500) equates to up to a 2.0x slower shootdown rate, depending on the ship.  And in competitive play, those destroyers that usually put out 50dps are putting out 600.  So it's quite stark.

Edited by _V12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nuttybiscuit    576
Just now, _V12 said:

I'm not sure if you are poorly interpreting my posts or doing so intentionally.

I have offered to agree with you (or at least disagreeably agree!), but you seem to have rejected my effort. So instead I am picking holes in your replies while teasing your ego:Smile_glasses:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
_V12    497
34 minutes ago, nuttybiscuit said:

I have offered to agree with you (or at least disagreeably agree!), but you seem to have rejected my effort. So instead I am picking holes in your replies while teasing your ego:Smile_glasses:

 

I do not compromise integrity for the sake of appeasing a veritable chimpanzee of a poster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
_V12    497

Ah....so this is why the ignore function exists.  Congratulations on being the first and only poster on the list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×