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

12000 players on the server, and we get garbage MM like this?

26 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,612
[INTEL]
Members
8,415 posts
25,260 battles

image.png.9c26f5412c8fc369d635b0b7ce016514.png 

12000 people on the server. Why does one team have 2 T8s and the other 1? Why does one team have 2 DDs and the other team 3? Why are 3 radars on 1 team and 1 on the other?

Of course this was a loss for green. Once we saw they had the radar and DD and tier advantage, it was over. Why were all three advantages given to one side? Completely wrong.

12000 people on the server. Why are T8s filling T10 matches when the server is crowded? There is neither need nor excuse for that. 

Time to hard balance the number of DDs, at minimum. No team should ever enter a match down one DD. People playing at T10 are willing to wait for a good match. WG, you need to stop prioritizing queue times over all other considerations.

Time to hard balance the number of T8s.

Time to hard balance radars.

 

 

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
418
[NATO]
Beta Testers
1,766 posts
5,805 battles

Wait....not a carrier complaint?

Are you feeling ok?

The MM sucks, it truly does. It fails to take so many things into consideration. They really need to factor in things like Radar, Hydro and the number of DD's. A well played DD that survives past the half way point will often decide a match containing no CV's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,033
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,150 posts
8,766 battles

Checks the calendar, yep it is a day ending in y. DD imbalance is really only an issue with epicenter where the DD's have to get right in but in the other battle types being down one just means they have to play different and get some help from the cruisers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,819
Members
5,574 posts
7,121 battles

First man in space, but MM alludes them... :Smile-_tongue:

Edited by Wulfgarn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,740 posts
5,464 battles
33 minutes ago, Taichunger said:

12000 people on the server. Why are T8s filling T10 matches when the server is crowded? There is neither need nor excuse for that.

This I completely agree with.

There should no longer be a population issue for T9/10 at prime time. That excuse can't fly anymore since the game has been around long enough for a large amount of players to reach those tiers. Not to mention that T8s being pulled up consistently, with the lack of majority T8(top tier) games for T8s, is evidence that the top tiers have enough ships to fill out their own match.

So yes, why are T8s being dragged up into T9/10 games just to fill them out? If over 70% of the match consists of T10 ships, the claim that the top tiers don't have enough players to fill out matches doesn't hold any water. There were likely enough T9/10s in queue to create a match without T8s. Why must the T8s suffer?

 

Edit: I wanted to add; I wouldn't mind having 11v11, 10v10, or even 9v9 games in my T9s, if meant that less T8s get pulled up(or get pulled up less frequently) into a T9/10 match, if such a population issue really does still exist at prime time.

Edited by GhostSwordsman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,033
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,150 posts
8,766 battles
1 minute ago, GhostSwordsman said:

This I completely agree with.

There should no longer be a population issue for T9/10 at prime time. That excuse can't fly anymore since the game has been around long enough for a large amount of players to reach those tiers. Not to mention that T8s being pulled up consistently, with the lack of majority T8(top tier) games for T8s, is evidence that the top tiers have enough ships to fill out their own match.

 

So yes, why are T8s being dragged up into T9/10 games just to fill them out? If over 70% of the match consists of T10 ships, then there were likely enough T9/10s in queue to create a match without T8s. Why must the T8s suffer?

During prime time yes but any balance factors added to the MM will also increase the number of low population que dumps because of people waiting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,740 posts
5,464 battles
4 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

During prime time yes but any balance factors added to the MM will also increase the number of low population que dumps because of people waiting.

Of course, I also don't quite understand why the MM seems to have this hard and fast rule that there must be 12 players per team. I personally wouldn't mind smaller matches, even at non-prime time hours for high tiers, so long as the matches weren't too small(I'd recommend a minimum of 8v8, no less).

I imagine that allowing MM to do stuff like that would alleviate some of the stress put on T8(during prime time and off-peak) since the MM could now form matches that aren't explicitly 12v12.

Edited by GhostSwordsman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,752
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
6,103 posts
1,313 battles

Its cause nobody plays tier 10 cause the meta sucks at those tiers.

 

Hell, the only real good tier to play anymore is tier 4 imo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,947
[PVE]
Members
8,834 posts
7,257 battles
23 minutes ago, Taichunger said:

image.png.9c26f5412c8fc369d635b0b7ce016514.png 

12000 people on the server. Why does one team have 2 T8s and the other 1? Why does one team have 2 DDs and the other team 3? Why are 3 radars on 1 team and 1 on the other?

Of course this was a loss for green. Once we saw they had the radar and DD and tier advantage, it was over. Why were all three advantages given to one side? Completely wrong.

12000 people on the server. Why are T8s filling T10 matches when the server is crowded? There is neither need nor excuse for that. 

Time to hard balance the number of DDs, at minimum. No team should ever enter a match down one DD. People playing at T10 are willing to wait for a good match. WG, you need to stop prioritizing queue times over all other considerations.

Time to hard balance the number of T8s.

Time to hard balance radars.

 

 

 

I have seen worse. Balancing RADAR would be nice, but almost certainly isn't done now. Just have to play hard, and for me, these were average games. Guess which was a win?

Spoiler

Conqueror                Montana
Missouri                   Musashi
Missouri                   Iowa
Missouri                    Lion
Missouri (me)           F Der Grosse
Moskva                    Zao
Minotaur                 Minotaur
Hindenburg             Des Moines
Saint-Louis             Prinz Eugen
Z-52                         Edinburgh
Udaloi                      Z-52
Kagero                     Yugumo

I'm sure the other team was was very salty about the 4(!) Missouris on our side. Here is the result as I didn't take a screen shot of the Loading Screen.

Spoiler

5hSap6b.jpg

bRyaeqO.jpg

We won of course. And yes, I'm not very good in PvP, but since I can not do the Yamamoto or Shinonome campaigns in PvE...

 

I was on the other side of Bad MM here with double the RADAR and 3:1 divisions.

aO31yDW.jpg

https://replayswows.com/replay/15921#stats  7.0

 

Spoiler

sR9Cg9k.jpg

 

ddD98y2.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,582
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,283 battles
40 minutes ago, Taichunger said:

image.png.9c26f5412c8fc369d635b0b7ce016514.png 

12000 people on the server. Why does one team have 2 T8s and the other 1? Why does one team have 2 DDs and the other team 3? Why are 3 radars on 1 team and 1 on the other?

Of course this was a loss for green. Once we saw they had the radar and DD and tier advantage, it was over. Why were all three advantages given to one side? Completely wrong.

12000 people on the server. Why are T8s filling T10 matches when the server is crowded? There is neither need nor excuse for that. 

Time to hard balance the number of DDs, at minimum. No team should ever enter a match down one DD. People playing at T10 are willing to wait for a good match. WG, you need to stop prioritizing queue times over all other considerations.

Time to hard balance the number of T8s.

Time to hard balance radars.

 

Come on, Tai.   With all those battles and you still ask these questions when you should darned well know the answers!  

Mind you, it's not that I don't agree with some of the points.

 

1. T8's.The problem I see in your MM is something I find annoying too.  It's not the tier +/-2 MM.  It's MM being so desperate to fill out two 12 player teams that it backfills with small numbers of tier 8's.  Mind you, I tend to think that tier 8 BBs and DDs can hold their own relatively well.  It's the tier 8 cruisers that get really boned.  I'd rather see MM reduce the team size to 11, rather than feel the need to add 1 tier 8 to teams that are otherwise 100% tiers 9 and 10.  And if by chance, between the 24 slots, MM needs only a single tier 8 to get that 24th slot filled, then punt back to 11 per team instead.

2. DDs.  I don't think that the mismatch of DDs is such a big deal in Standard battles as it is in Domination or Epicenter.  Also, DD mismatches can be deceptive.  What it one of the DDs happens to be a hardcore Russian gunboat DD, i.e. the kind that won't go near a cap as long as there's something a TON stealthier than it is and would keep it spotted for an enemy cruiser to blow it away?  Those sorts of Russian DDs are more like light cruisers, and I don't really mean in the sense that people think of the Khab as a bit of a light cruiser, though close.  I mean more like a ship that's got the concealment of a light cruiser and would be almost as vulnerable.  Those DDs want nothing to do with caps while they might run into a stealthy ninja DD.  However, those "CL" DD's can exist on either team, so you could have a case where instead of being down 2-3, you're really down 1-3.  Or visa-versa, instead of 2-3, it could be 2-2.  Those gunboat DD's sort of throw a monkey wrench into the mix.

3. Radar.  MM doesn't check consumables.  The problem is that the RADAR consumable is so game-changing that I think that they need to start reconsidering this.  Also, the fact that the Missouri has radar also throws a monkey wrench into the mix.  If it didn't have radar, this problem might not be quite as bad.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
170
[OSG]
Beta Testers
1,345 posts
14,736 battles

I don't have a problem living with what the MM is now since it makes for faster matchmaking and for more variability in the teams.   And having one more or less tier in total is almost irrelevant.  Do we really want each battle to have mirrored ships?  And then mirrored builds on each ship?  And then mirrored captain's skills?  And then mirrored etc, etc, etc.? 

Leave it as is imo.

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
325
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
1,321 posts
14,681 battles
31 minutes ago, GhostSwordsman said:

Edit: I wanted to add; I wouldn't mind having 11v11, 10v10, or even 9v9 games in my T9s, if meant that less T8s get pulled up(or get pulled up less frequently) into a T9/10 match, if such a population issue really does still exist at prime time.

I like this.  Although 9v9 should be the least possible I would rather have a T9/10  match rather then pulling up T8s when server is full.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
9,434 posts
11,601 battles

  i've seen worse MM.    it was challengig MM though.   any match is winnable with good teamwork which rarely exist. 

 

if you look at the attached result,  you expect the red team to roll us based on player ranking.  yet we won  strong.   

shot-18.02.05_18.28.57-0452.jpg

Edited by centarina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,430 posts
12,163 battles

MM, catch the fever.

kek, our team had this guy, against a 3 man div form OPG including a CV. WG should provide refunds for all of our camo and flags lost and doubloons for our time.

PASA013.png Essex 9 CV usa.svg USA 128 20.31% 28,696 565 0.6 0.2 8.9 56% 0% 0% 381

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
156
[7TF]
Members
340 posts
1,328 battles

This is pretty typical lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,823
[ARRGG]
[ARRGG]
Members
5,770 posts

MM is not perfect. MM is the best we have at this time. The MM knows not what is does or doesn't do. When the Battle Button is pressed I do not question the results I fight each battle to the best of what I am capable of. I don't see the odds of Win/Loss or the stacking factor. I see a gathering of ships prepared for battle.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,430 posts
12,163 battles

And this gem, enemy CV just had a 7 kill kraken...catch the fever....

PASA013.png Essex 9 CV usa.svg USA 153 35.29% 33,704 776 1.0 0.5 13.0 50% 0% 0% 541

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,459
[AXANR]
Members
3,354 posts
16,514 battles
1 hour ago, BrushWolf said:

During prime time yes but any balance factors added to the MM will also increase the number of low population que dumps because of people waiting.

I'd rather have a low pop queue dump 4v4 that's balanced than an imbalanced 12v12 any day of the week. 

I see no need to balance for radar (although it should at least be close...4 on one side and 0 on the other is an issue.) I see no need to balance for tier 8s...I've never seen a game with more than +/- 1 or (very rarely) 2 tier 8s unless the other team had multiple screwed up divs anyway. But DD imbalance is huge, especially in domination or epicenter. 

Simple solution: If the number of DDs isnt balanced, it automatically goes to standard battle. Having one fewer DD dioesnt hurt as bad in standard battle. It really sucks in domination or epicenter, tho, especially if, let's say, you have two DDs and one is a Khabarovsk while they have three stealthy DDs. You've lost your caps before you even start the battle in that situation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,033
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,150 posts
8,766 battles
1 hour ago, Kitsunelegend said:

Its cause nobody plays tier 10 cause the meta sucks at those tiers.

 

Hell, the only real good tier to play anymore is tier 4 imo

Four - six is still the best tiers to play enjoyment wise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,430 posts
12,163 battles
3 minutes ago, centarina said:

so many potato high tier CV players.  not sure if they are bots or trolls   :Smile_sceptic:

I ask them every game, are you human....no response....every game. I would bet that they are indeed bots designed to give play time to those that do want to play CV...every time, no camo no flags no communication, literally nothing.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,033
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,150 posts
8,766 battles
Just now, poeticmotion said:

I'd rather have a low pop queue dump 4v4 that's balanced than an imbalanced 12v12 any day of the week. 

I see no need to balance for radar (although it should at least be close...4 on one side and 0 on the other is an issue.) I see no need to balance for tier 8s...I've never seen a game with more than +/- 1 or (very rarely) 2 tier 8s unless the other team had multiple screwed up divs anyway. But DD imbalance is huge, especially in domination or epicenter. 

Simple solution: If the number of DDs isnt balanced, it automatically goes to standard battle. Having one fewer DD dioesnt hurt as bad in standard battle. It really sucks in domination or epicenter, tho, especially if, let's say, you have two DDs and one is a Khabarovsk while they have three stealthy DDs. You've lost your caps before you even start the battle in that situation. 

The problem is the que dumps would be ignoring these new rules. To be honest I fear what could happen if they don't get the added rules completely right. There was an undocumented skill factor in the WoWP MM for quite awhile and some people were waiting 20 minutes plus to get a match and of course Persha never admits to a mistake so it only went away recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,740 posts
5,464 battles
1 hour ago, Warped_1 said:

I like this.  Although 9v9 should be the least possible I would rather have a T9/10  match rather then pulling up T8s when server is full.

The only other alternative would be to mimic WoT MM, where if it's going to be a T9/10 match, then the T9/10 ships only make up like 20-25%(maybe 30%) of the ships in the game, where the rest of the ships are bottom tier.(at least, that's what I hear. Don't play WoT myself) Would go a long way in helping T8s not feel so helpless when having to face T9 and T10 ships.

It would be nice to not have to worry about more than one or two T9/10 BBs or cruisers and have the majority of the opposing team be of the same tier.

Edited by GhostSwordsman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×