Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
cecill611

MM Only T8

27 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

57
[PVE]
Members
359 posts

5b4a0dc88d037_Screenshot(8)_LI.thumb.jpg.3721effe00567ad31ce246c6937c68a9.jpg5b49699e61796_Screenshot(7).thumb.png.da753a1de367bb34819d87e0c36d0727.png

This is what you can do sometimes when you don`t give up because you are the only T8 on the team..

The T8 on the other team had a good game to..

 

 

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
781
[NG-NL]
Members
5,017 posts
8,249 battles

A BB uptiers pretty well, generally. Usually it's cruisers and CVs that have the hardest time.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
774
[SF-A]
Members
2,893 posts
5,694 battles
2 minutes ago, Reymu said:

A BB uptiers pretty well, generally. Usually it's cruisers and CVs that have the hardest time.

Have to disagree with the cruiser part. I would say it's DDs and CVs. For carriers, the AA guns scale very quickly, but with DDs, competitive concealment gets very difficult to deal with.

We cruisers can just HE spam bigger targets. Yeah, their hulls have a better resistance coefficient, but most cruisers can do significant damage anyways since fire damage is percent based. Besides, we're used to being made of paper, so that's nothing new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,793
[SALVO]
Members
17,056 posts
17,716 battles
4 minutes ago, Reymu said:

A BB uptiers pretty well, generally. Usually it's cruisers and CVs that have the hardest time.

^ 100000% This!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,793
[SALVO]
Members
17,056 posts
17,716 battles
Just now, pewpewpew42 said:

Have to disagree with the cruiser part. I would say it's DDs and CVs. For carriers, the AA guns scale very quickly, but with DDs, competitive concealment gets very difficult to deal with.

We cruisers can just HE spam bigger targets. Yeah, their hulls have a better resistance coefficient, but most cruisers can do significant damage anyways since fire damage is percent based. Besides, we're used to being made of paper, so that's nothing new.

I disagree.  The problem that some tier 8 cruisers face is a lack of range, due to the lack of the tier 9 gun range enhancing upgrade module.

As for tier 8 DDs, I don't see them as being at that big a disadvantage vs higher tier DDs.  For DDs, it's tier 6 and 7 DDs that are boned, specifically due to the lack of the tier 8 concealment upgrade module.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
781
[NG-NL]
Members
5,017 posts
8,249 battles
2 minutes ago, pewpewpew42 said:

Have to disagree with the cruiser part. I would say it's DDs and CVs. For carriers, the AA guns scale very quickly, but with DDs, competitive concealment gets very difficult to deal with.

We cruisers can just HE spam bigger targets. Yeah, their hulls have a better resistance coefficient, but most cruisers can do significant damage anyways since fire damage is percent based. Besides, we're used to being made of paper, so that's nothing new.

Was thinking of Chappy, Cleve, Baltimore, Mogami, Charles. Thin armor. Only Hipper had decent armor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
774
[SF-A]
Members
2,893 posts
5,694 battles
1 minute ago, Reymu said:

Was thinking of Chappy, Cleve, Baltimore, Mogami, Charles. Thin armor. Only Hipper had decent armor.

Well, with Chappy, Mogami, and Charles in particular, kiting and HE spam is a go-to regardless of tier. Their armor is always, and will always be awful, so the playstyle barely changes. You just have to be a little more careful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,793
[SALVO]
Members
17,056 posts
17,716 battles
19 minutes ago, cecill611 said:

5b4a0dc88d037_Screenshot(8)_LI.thumb.jpg.3721effe00567ad31ce246c6937c68a9.jpg5b49699e61796_Screenshot(7).thumb.png.da753a1de367bb34819d87e0c36d0727.png

This is what you can do sometimes when you don`t give up because you are the only T8 on the team..

The T8 on the other team had a good game to..

 

 

Guys, what cecill is pointing out here is a very valid concern, regardless of how well some tier 8's handle being uptiered.  Being the lone tier 8 in a tier 10 battle stinks.  Worse, look closely at the above teams and you'll see that there's only 1 tier 9 per team too.  10 tier 10's, 1 tier 9, and 1 tier 8 ship per team is really cruddy MM for the tier 9 and tier 8 players on those teams.  There really should be a better distribution of the tiers on those teams so that bottom and mid tier ships aren't swamped by teams composed overwhelmingly of top tier ships.

This topic was actually discussed just a 2-3 days ago.  And people just don't pay attention to the real issue the OP brought up in both cases.  The unfairness of the tier distribution.  And in both threads, people keep drifting off to discuss whether tier 8's can deal with being uptiered or +/-2 tier MM, but do NOT discuss the real issue, unfair and imbalanced tier distribution on the teams.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,211
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,624 posts
9,027 battles

The real point here is don't give up before the match even starts. Yeah you may go down fast and ugly but if you play smart you can make the enemy know that they were in a hell of a fight.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,793
[SALVO]
Members
17,056 posts
17,716 battles
6 minutes ago, pewpewpew42 said:

Well, with Chappy, Mogami, and Charles in particular, kiting and HE spam is a go-to regardless of tier. Their armor is always, and will always be awful, so the playstyle barely changes. You just have to be a little more careful.

Meh, their armor is cruiser armor.  Oh, some cruisers have armor that's even weak by cruiser standards.  But if a cruiser had BB armor, it'd be a BB.  And if your aunt had a (you know what), she'd be your uncle.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,793
[SALVO]
Members
17,056 posts
17,716 battles
Just now, BrushWolf said:

The real point here is don't give up before the match even starts. Yeah you may go down fast and ugly but if you play smart you can make the enemy know that they were in a hell of a fight.

No, that's not the real point.  The real point is unfair and imbalanced tier distribution of teams.  Period.

It's all well and good to say to not give up before the battle has started, but that's just a diversion from the real point, which doesn't go away just because one sucks it up and plays their hardest as the lone tier 8 in a tier 10 battle.  It's a problem that needs to be addressed and fixed.

 

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,722
[TBW]
Members
6,403 posts
12,050 battles
28 minutes ago, cecill611 said:

The T8 on the other team had a good game to..

To what? or did you mean also? As in too. What you are implying here, is that you prefer to be uptiered. Of course you can do good once in a while. Big deal, I notice you didn't show the games where you were deleted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,787
Members
9,968 posts
33 minutes ago, cecill611 said:

5b4a0dc88d037_Screenshot(8)_LI.thumb.jpg.3721effe00567ad31ce246c6937c68a9.jpg5b49699e61796_Screenshot(7).thumb.png.da753a1de367bb34819d87e0c36d0727.png

This is what you can do sometimes when you don`t give up because you are the only T8 on the team..

The T8 on the other team had a good game to..

 

 

 

So a single game, getting carried by a Des Moines, fighting what was apparently a spud farm, means this MM is ok? :Smile_amazed:

Lack of data points seems to be a problem here.....:Smile_teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,722
[TBW]
Members
6,403 posts
12,050 battles
6 minutes ago, Crucis said:

And if your aunt had a (you know what), she'd be your uncle.

A same sex life partner?

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,211
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,624 posts
9,027 battles
22 minutes ago, Crucis said:

No, that's not the real point.  The real point is unfair and imbalanced tier distribution of teams.  Period.

It's all well and good to say to not give up before the battle has started, but that's just a diversion from the real point, which doesn't go away just because one sucks it up and plays their hardest as the lone tier 8 in a tier 10 battle.  It's a problem that needs to be addressed and fixed.

 

How do you "fix" this problem? Narrowing the tier spread is a placebo and it would not take long before the complaints about being bottom tier would resurface and for overpowered ships would magnify it because they would never be bottom tier in a three tier match. Thank you for responding instead of just doing a drive by neg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,262
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,797 posts
15,236 battles
1 hour ago, pewpewpew42 said:

I would say it's DDs

The only bad thing with DD upscaling is the tier 7 to 8 jump where 8 gets the concealment upgrade, other than that it isn't a huge deal, just an annoying one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,822 posts
5,596 battles
1 hour ago, Crucis said:

Guys, what cecill is pointing out here is a very valid concern, regardless of how well some tier 8's handle being uptiered.  Being the lone tier 8 in a tier 10 battle stinks.  Worse, look closely at the above teams and you'll see that there's only 1 tier 9 per team too.  10 tier 10's, 1 tier 9, and 1 tier 8 ship per team is really cruddy MM for the tier 9 and tier 8 players on those teams.  There really should be a better distribution of the tiers on those teams so that bottom and mid tier ships aren't swamped by teams composed overwhelmingly of top tier ships.

This topic was actually discussed just a 2-3 days ago.  And people just don't pay attention to the real issue the OP brought up in both cases.  The unfairness of the tier distribution.  And in both threads, people keep drifting off to discuss whether tier 8's can deal with being uptiered or +/-2 tier MM, but do NOT discuss the real issue, unfair and imbalanced tier distribution on the teams.

I wish I  could +1 this more than one time...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,211
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,624 posts
9,027 battles
1 hour ago, Umikami said:

The only bad thing with DD upscaling is the tier 7 to 8 jump where 8 gets the concealment upgrade, other than that it isn't a huge deal, just an annoying one. 

Yeah but even without access to that upgrade module a DD is far more stealthy than any cruiser or BB. You just have to leave the initial spotting to the more stealthy DD's while you support them.

2 hours ago, Crucis said:

No, that's not the real point.  The real point is unfair and imbalanced tier distribution of teams.  Period.

It's all well and good to say to not give up before the battle has started, but that's just a diversion from the real point, which doesn't go away just because one sucks it up and plays their hardest as the lone tier 8 in a tier 10 battle.  It's a problem that needs to be addressed and fixed.

 

I should have quoted this in my other reply to you. These matches with weird tier groupings are quite likely mini que dumps where the MM was waiting for some tier 8's or whatever tier is under represented. I don't know if there anything that can be done that wouldn't have a high probability of FUBAR'ing the MM completely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57
[PVE]
Members
359 posts
2 hours ago, BrushWolf said:

The real point here is don't give up before the match even starts. Yeah you may go down fast and ugly but if you play smart you can make the enemy know that they were in a hell of a fight.

Yes this is my point..

I have gone down fast and ugly many times but you never know what can happen when you play.

I did give the Des Moines +1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,046
Members
3,784 posts
14,050 battles
2 hours ago, pewpewpew42 said:

Have to disagree with the cruiser part. I would say it's DDs and CVs. For carriers, the AA guns scale very quickly, but with DDs, competitive concealment gets very difficult to deal with.

We cruisers can just HE spam bigger targets. Yeah, their hulls have a better resistance coefficient, but most cruisers can do significant damage anyways since fire damage is percent based. Besides, we're used to being made of paper, so that's nothing new.

Tier 8 Cruisers are nothing but fodder for tier 10s. They're outranged, outgunned, and have much lower health.

A tier 8 Cruiser in a tier 10 heavy match is not a combatant, it's a victim.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,793
[SALVO]
Members
17,056 posts
17,716 battles
1 hour ago, BrushWolf said:

I should have quoted this in my other reply to you. These matches with weird tier groupings are quite likely mini que dumps where the MM was waiting for some tier 8's or whatever tier is under represented. I don't know if there anything that can be done that wouldn't have a high probability of FUBAR'ing the MM completely.

My suggestion for a simple fix would be this.  If MM tries to form two teams that are 11 tier 10s and 1 tier 8, just drop the tier 8's and run with 11 ship teams instead.  In the case of the OP's teams (10 t10's, 1 t9, and 1 t8), I'd just drop the 1 t9 and 1 t8 from the teams and go with two teams of 10 tier 10's.

My larger solution would be for MM to form teams as follows (obviously depending on the contend of the queue).

A. 2 t10, 4 t9, 6 t8 teams.

B. 5 t10, 7 t9 teams.

or

C. 12 t10 teams.

There could be a little bit of flexibility in options A or B.  For example, you might see an option "A" team of 2 t10, 3 t9, and 7 t8.  Or you could see an option B team of 4 t10's and 8 t9's; or possibly 6 t10s and 6 t9s.  But the overriding idea would be to produce teams with a good distribution of tiers where the bottom tier ships were never outnumbered by the higher tier ships.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,211
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,624 posts
9,027 battles
4 minutes ago, Crucis said:

My suggestion for a simple fix would be this.  If MM tries to form two teams that are 11 tier 10s and 1 tier 8, just drop the tier 8's and run with 11 ship teams instead.  In the case of the OP's teams (10 t10's, 1 t9, and 1 t8), I'd just drop the 1 t9 and 1 t8 from the teams and go with two teams of 10 tier 10's.

My larger solution would be for MM to form teams as follows (obviously depending on the contend of the queue).

A. 2 t10, 4 t9, 6 t8 teams.

B. 5 t10, 7 t9 teams.

or

C. 12 t10 teams.

There could be a little bit of flexibility in options A or B.  For example, you might see an option "A" team of 2 t10, 3 t9, and 7 t8.  Or you could see an option B team of 4 t10's and 8 t9's; or possibly 6 t10s and 6 t9s.  But the overriding idea would be to produce teams with a good distribution of tiers where the bottom tier ships were never outnumbered by the higher tier ships.

 

The theory is alright but I am fearful of additional complications to the MM that can come back and bite the players. This happened in WoWP when an undocumented skill factor was put in and many players were being left behind in the que with match after match being created while they were left hanging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
171
[WOLFB]
Members
451 posts
3,836 battles

Regarding the issue of tier distribution of teams:

You can't base anything on one game. This is all anecdote and opinion.

Collect some data.

I decided to do just that: I am tracking how many ships are on the team for each game I play. So I can look at the highest tier, the median tier and the mean tier. Those numbers matter. [also day and time]

I personally feel like the wider spread on matchmaking is overall not a big deal - sometimes you're uptiered, some times your downtiered. Which just adds to the variety of the game. Which is more fun.

But that -- the last paragraph I wrote -- doesn't mean squat because it's just how I personally feel. I am not certain of it. So I'm going to keep some data.

I'm keeping data because literally the only thing I do not like about this game is how much complaining there is. (and yes, I do it too sometimes. but then I regret it)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,793
[SALVO]
Members
17,056 posts
17,716 battles
4 hours ago, BrushWolf said:

The theory is alright but I am fearful of additional complications to the MM that can come back and bite the players. This happened in WoWP when an undocumented skill factor was put in and many players were being left behind in the que with match after match being created while they were left hanging.

Could you elaborate on this, BrushWolf?  This is interesting.    I'm all for trying to avoid unforeseen secondary effects of changes.  (I just wish that politicians would do this when they're thinking about new laws/policies.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
770
[MIA-A]
Members
2,111 posts
6,750 battles

Just had this one, heh.

We were #1/#5 in our win, for what it's worth.

unknown.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×