Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
IronMike11B4O

Dear WGing

18 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

568
[KP]
Members
2,066 posts
18,782 battles

As long as operation of the Week is +/-0 tiers , Rank is +/-0 tiers  and Clan Battles are +/-0 tiers I'm always going to check Extremely Dissatisfied so stop friggin asking me after battles where I place first and then next closest guy is 700XP behind me. That's 4 times today all after ROFL stomps in Randoms with your effed up MM.

Edited by IronMike11B4O
  • Cool 4
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
177
[PVE]
Members
382 posts
8,597 battles

Did the same tonight. Its like they want to find players who enjoy losing streaks.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
568
[KP]
Members
2,066 posts
18,782 battles
8 minutes ago, Cruiser_Noshiro said:

Why are you wanting multiple tiers in ranked and CBs...?

I don't but if those can be +/-0 with less than 30 second wait times then there is no reason for randoms to be +/-2 the argument of longer wait times doesn't hold any water.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,876
[HINON]
Supertester
19,207 posts
12,733 battles
56 minutes ago, IronMike11B4O said:

I don't but if those can be +/-0 with less than 30 second wait times then there is no reason for randoms to be +/-2 the argument of longer wait times doesn't hold any water.

There are ten tiers in random queues, meaning that the entire population will be spread over ten tiers. There are two tiers for ranked, meaning that the entire population will be concentrated over just two tiers.

  • Cool 3
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,793
[SALVO]
Members
17,055 posts
17,692 battles
53 minutes ago, IronMike11B4O said:

I don't but if those can be +/-0 with less than 30 second wait times then there is no reason for randoms to be +/-2 the argument of longer wait times doesn't hold any water.

What does the presence of +/-2 tier MM have to do with you doing extremely well and the rest of your team stinking?  You can have those very same team mates in battles with +/-0 tier MM just  as easily.

For that matter, even if skill based MM was instituted, you can still have massacres, because one of the biggest reasons for massacres is the snowballing effect.  That is, if one team gains a leads (in ship sunk), it becomes easier for them to increase that lead, and more difficult for the trailing team to decrease the deficit.  And the greater the lead, the easier and easier it becomes to further increase the lead.  And so on and so on.  It doesn't change even if the two teams have an equal distribution of talent.

The only way that a trailing team can prevent snowballing is to make a concerted effort when they fall behind to kill the most damaged enemy ships they see.  Don't let them escape to heal up (if they have the ability) or just get out of range and behind hard cover.  Get them sunk ASAP.  But that's often easier said than done.

Another problem can be that even with an even distribution of talent, one team might have all its talented players in top tier ships, while the other team has its talented players in bottom tier ships.  I don't think that it's hard to understand that it's more likely that the team with the talents players in the top tier ships has an advantage there.  And I expect that it'd take a LOT more time for MM to try to balance out this potential imbalance.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
388
[C-CA]
[C-CA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,423 posts
3,367 battles

Ah you kids today don't know how good you've got it. I remember +/-3 in the early days of tanks, and sometimes even that didn't hold! You'd see tier 5s having to hold their own against 10s every now and then, the lowest tiers past tier 1 were just food for the higher tier tanks, and don't even get me started on scout the special MM that some classes had to endure because their lines didn't reach tier 10. You ever see a tier 5 with a *WoWs equivalent would probably be a 460mm with a two minute reload*? Ever see that tier 5 have to stare down a *WoWs equivalent would be a Grosser Kurfurst*? I have, it was damn terrifying. +/-2 is fine. Now get off my lawn!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,286
[SOUP]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,560 posts

Don't mind me, just in this thread mining up some salt for my soup recipes

5730c9e852bcd029008c1bdb-750-600.jpg

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
215
[ZR]
WoWS Wiki Editor
564 posts
4,790 battles

+/-2 is fine and is not the issue. 

  • Cool 3
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,793
[SALVO]
Members
17,055 posts
17,692 battles
8 minutes ago, mrmariokartguy said:

+/-2 is fine and is not the issue. 

While I don't have a problem with +/-2 tier MM, I don't think that it's really relevant to the problem that IronMike's having.  Like I said earlier, he could have a team of all tier 10's or tier 8's and he could still face the exact same problem.  Rotten potatoes are not limited to a given tier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,793
[SALVO]
Members
17,055 posts
17,692 battles
31 minutes ago, Landsraad said:

Ah you kids today don't know how good you've got it. I remember +/-3 in the early days of tanks, and sometimes even that didn't hold! You'd see tier 5s having to hold their own against 10s every now and then, the lowest tiers past tier 1 were just food for the higher tier tanks, and don't even get me started on scout the special MM that some classes had to endure because their lines didn't reach tier 10. You ever see a tier 5 with a *WoWs equivalent would probably be a 460mm with a two minute reload*? Ever see that tier 5 have to stare down a *WoWs equivalent would be a Grosser Kurfurst*? I have, it was damn terrifying. +/-2 is fine. Now get off my lawn!

For what it's worth, IronMike's no kid.  Not by a long shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
388
[C-CA]
[C-CA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,423 posts
3,367 battles

I don't doubt it, I just wanted to put a humorous spin on my response.

 

Welp, that's one more joke dead on a arrival. Ship it off to the morgue. Move along people, nothing to see here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,640 posts
7,467 battles

Ill just sit here with my no tier restrictions MM desires and laugh.

haha, ha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
653
[-K-]
Supertester, In AlfaTesters
2,069 posts
9,481 battles
1 hour ago, Lert said:

There are ten tiers in random queues, meaning that the entire population will be spread over ten tiers. There are two tiers for ranked, meaning that the entire population will be concentrated over just two tiers.

This and also in randoms it is 12 v 12 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,228
[GWG]
[GWG]
Members
5,405 posts
9,562 battles

Apparently, there is an objection to the impromptu surveys.

OooooooooooKaaaaaaayyyy...   No more surveys for this guy..  Check.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
233
[TBOW]
Members
1,252 posts
10,669 battles
4 hours ago, Lert said:

There are ten tiers in random queues, meaning that the entire population will be spread over ten tiers. There are two tiers for ranked, meaning that the entire population will be concentrated over just two tiers.

Lert, afraid you are just off there, there are 3 tiers for Ranked.  Up through rank 11 is T8. 10-2 is Tier 10 and Rank 1 is Tier 7 is what I remember the setup being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,876
[HINON]
Supertester
19,207 posts
12,733 battles
1 minute ago, gcangel82 said:

Lert, afraid you are just off there, there are 3 tiers for Ranked.  Up through rank 11 is T8. 10-2 is Tier 10 and Rank 1 is Tier 7 is what I remember the setup being.

Rank 1 population is going to be so tiny it doesn't really affect MM queueueueue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,600
[TASH]
Members
5,016 posts
8,094 battles

I don't think WG cares if you keep putting the same thing in the survey and just complaining about some lame excuse.

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.

×