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

Hey WG, since you are scrambling the meta anyway...

35 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

4,316
[INTEL]
Members
9,266 posts
26,933 battles

...why not make it possible for at least one server to do one tier  spread instead of a two tier spread? Or maybe have a one tier spread for a few peak periods midweek and rotate that across the servers, and see what the playerbase thinks? 

  • Cool 5
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 2
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51
[STW-M]
Beta Testers
273 posts
7,751 battles

well i would love for them to do that but the chances of that ever happening is very slim. Specially considering how there are way to many people on these forums that keep insisting that mm is fine. Despite the fact that the most common threads is all about mm and how they complain about being bottom tier. Its one of the biggest complains about this game and the cause of a lot of people quiting the game. Yet you will keep seeing the same folks clamor on saying mm is fine. I can deal with it, but even I get sick of the mm and stop playing for weeks before i start playing again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
614
[WOLF4]
Members
1,320 posts
2,856 battles
9 minutes ago, Taichunger said:

...why not make it possible for at least one server to do one tier  spread instead of a two tier spread? Or maybe have a one tier spread for a few peak periods midweek and rotate that across the servers, and see what the playerbase thinks? 

Oh but WG says the population isn't big enough. it would make que times awful.

There's enough players to gamble with this CV crap though apparently.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,799
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
17,484 posts
10,170 battles
7 minutes ago, xalmgrey said:

Oh but WG says the population isn't big enough. it would make que times awful.

There's enough players to gamble with this CV crap though apparently.

It was either gamble with the CV rework or remove them because outside of tier 4 - 6 they not played by more than a tiny minority of the player base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
790
[WORX]
Members
2,561 posts
13,923 battles

How about, not making ships so over capable to where the -/+2 MM is no longer an issue because of it? That way, a bottom tier has or in a specified range. The same reasonable capabilities then a ship two tiers up or two tiers below. 

 

IMO ^^^ is an easy fix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
338
[WOLFC]
Members
767 posts
7,357 battles
9 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

How about, not making ships so over capable to where the -/+2 MM is no longer an issue because of it? That way, a bottom tier has or in a specified range. The same reasonable capabilities then a ship two tiers up or two tiers below. 

 

IMO ^^^ is an easy fix.

Easy fix?  Take that to the full range and extent and everything from Tier 5 to 10 would have to have the same basic capabilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
614
[WOLF4]
Members
1,320 posts
2,856 battles
17 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

How about, not making ships so over capable to where the -/+2 MM is no longer an issue because of it? That way, a bottom tier has or in a specified range. The same reasonable capabilities then a ship two tiers up or two tiers below. 

 

IMO ^^^ is an easy fix.

More like a barrel of monkeys balancing wise. Where would the incentive to grind up the tiers come from if ships 5-10 are roughly the same?

That's an easy way to kill the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
790
[WORX]
Members
2,561 posts
13,923 battles
6 minutes ago, DocWalker said:

Easy fix?  Take that to the full range and extent and everything from Tier 5 to 10 would have to have the same basic capabilities.

It is an easy fix... Its easy to nerf ships that were made to be over capable for its tier in order to sell. The down point of this is the current MM will take a beating. 

Now no one wants their fav ship nerfed. Its one of the symptoms that can be easily fixed. 

IT will also give relief of the tier 8 ship players who face tier 10 BB God ships. So yes I say nerf ships so that the current MM is fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
614
[WOLF4]
Members
1,320 posts
2,856 battles
4 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

It is an easy fix... Its easy to nerf ships that were made to be over capable for its tier in order to sell. The down point of this is the current MM will take a beating. 

Now no one wants their fav ship nerfed. Its one of the symptoms that can be easily fixed. 

IT will also give relief of the tier 8 ship players who face tier 10 BB God ships. So yes I say nerf ships so that the current MM is fair.

You should make a poll with this proposal. See what the community would think of ALL ships getting a massive nerf like that.

Give you a hint what the game would look like inside a week of that change:

 

tenor.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
851 posts
5,263 battles
9 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

It is an easy fix... Its easy to nerf ships that were made to be over capable for its tier in order to sell. The down point of this is the current MM will take a beating. 

Now no one wants their fav ship nerfed. Its one of the symptoms that can be easily fixed. 

IT will also give relief of the tier 8 ship players who face tier 10 BB God ships. So yes I say nerf ships so that the current MM is fair.

How about No? Why would I want to grind a line if the next one is almost like the one I am playing currently ? 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
790
[WORX]
Members
2,561 posts
13,923 battles
16 minutes ago, xalmgrey said:

More like a barrel of monkeys balancing wise. Where would the incentive to grind up the tiers come from if ships 5-10 are roughly the same?

That's an easy way to kill the game.

Totally disagree with this Assessment. The game is not fun starting at tier 8 and above, using the current MM rules because ships are Over capable. I am not saying a tier 5 have the same stats as a tier 7.  IF the game continues like this, Not having fun is more of a game killer then say incentive to grind up.

All I am saying is for EX:

DMG recived should be in reasonable range to survive the current MM  Rules. Cruisers/DDs should not have a 3 to 1 or 2 to 1 HP disadvantage with a BB who has double the gun caliber.  (I am describing a common complaint of tier 8 tier 9 guys who always point out. They're gun fodder to tier 10 ships).

This should be an easy fix.... IF tier 10 is not fun for all IMO, THAT is more of a game killer in the long run.

Edited by Navalpride33
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
614
[WOLF4]
Members
1,320 posts
2,856 battles
1 minute ago, Navalpride33 said:

Totally disagree with this Assessment. The game is not fun starting at tier 8 and above, using the current MM rules because ships are Over capable. I am not saying a tier 5 have the same stats as a tier 7.  IF the game continues like this, Not having fun is more of a game killer then say incentive to grind up.

All I am saying is for EX:

DMG recived should be in reasonable range to survive the current MM  Rules. Cruisers/DDs should not have a 3 to 1 or 2 to 1 HP disadvantage with a BB who has double the gun caliber.  (I am describing a common complaint of tier 8 tier 9 guys who always point out. They're gun fodder to tier 10 ships).

His should be an easy fix.... IF tier 10 is not fun for all IMO, THAT is more a game killer in the long run.

You might not be counting the players that have spent time and money getting those ships to where they are now. There's no way the community would take a huge change like this and stay intact. A game with player retention problems doesn't need to stir the hive like this. It would be a PR nightmare.

I get your example, but its a terrible idea honestly. That's why i proposed you making a poll with this intent. So you could see first hand just how bad this idea is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
790
[WORX]
Members
2,561 posts
13,923 battles
4 minutes ago, xalmgrey said:

You might not be counting the players that have spent time and money getting those ships to where they are now. There's no way the community would take a huge change like this and stay intact. A game with player retention problems doesn't need to stir the hive like this. It would be a PR nightmare.

I get your example, but its a terrible idea honestly. That's why i proposed you making a poll with this intent. So you could see first hand just how bad this idea is.

Sometimes to fix something we have to take away he element that created the mess in the first place.... A catch 22.. All I am saying is, dont complain about MM if you like your over capable ship.... ITs the over capable ship that is messing up MM. But I just get away from tier 10 myself.... Mid tiers are fun but Power creep and again over capable ships are taking the fun away from the tiers.

Edited by Navalpride33
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
338
[WOLFC]
Members
767 posts
7,357 battles
21 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

.... A catch 22..

OK, so here's a scenario for ya ...

<Sarcasm Mode> ON

Pre Christmas:
(Intention) Ship Team Leader: 
⦁    We must ensure within every class, each ship is balanced with every one of it's peers at the same tier!
(Implementation) Ship Lead Programmer:
⦁    OK, everybody ... start nerfing every strong ship until its performance is no better than the weakest ship of the same tier and class.

(Intention) MM Team Leader:
⦁    We must standardize the frequency and reduce the number of Tier 8 ships that have to battle against Tier 10 ships!
(Implementation) MM Lead Programmer:
⦁    OK, everybody ... let's make sure there is one and only one Tier 8 ship in every Tier 10 match.

Users ... man, this is screwed up

Other Users ... it's fine, get gud

Post Christmas:
(Intention) Senior Strategy Leader:
⦁    We must nerf all Tier 6 ships so Tier 5 can be more competitive with them.
⦁    We must nerf all Tier 7 ships so Tier 6 (now at Tier 5) can be more competitive with them.
⦁    We must nerf ... oh, hell, just nerf everything to Tier 5 levels ....

(Implementation) .... care to fill in the details?

<Sarcasm Mode> OFF

 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,240
Members
4,094 posts
15,015 battles
3 hours ago, xalmgrey said:

Oh but WG says the population isn't big enough. it would make que times awful.

The playerbase would very likely be bigger if it wasn't for the +2 -2 MM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
141
[WOLF5]
Members
619 posts
22,138 battles
1 hour ago, ReddNekk said:

The playerbase would very likely be bigger if it wasn't for the +2 -2 MM.

The show WG the proof that +/-1 MM will grow the playerbase and make them more money. Their stated fear is that off peak hours, matches are not filled immediately/quickly - if they gate more parameters for MM, the wait is going to be longer. They believe that most people will not wait longer than the times now and if they did you are far more likely to have AFK players because they just queued, went away after a minute and didn't see that the game actually started. They think that is more of an impediment to growing the playerbase than +/-2 MM complaints. 

Look at some of the oddball CV games from off peak hours where you saw anywhere from 3-6 ships per side. Yes, the CV has to have mirror matchmaking so unless there are 2 CV's in queue, MM can't make the match. BUT the fact that they couldn't fill the match shows that there are not sufficient players in queue. If you restrict the queue to +/-1 then that breaks even more. 

Heck look at the recent post that showed a full 12v12 battleship only match. That means that the soft limit of 4 BBs and 4 DDs couldn't be made and MM reverted to the old parameters and just grabbed 24 available ships that were in the tier spread. 

The only tweeks that I think we can do to MM as it stands now is to 1) split identical ships - that way you won't see matches where you have 2 Montys vs 2 Yammys or 2 gearings vs 2 shimis; and 2) split the number of radar ships so that you won't get matches where it's 3 radars on one side vs 1 on the other. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,634
[_-_]
Members
1,577 posts
5 hours ago, xalmgrey said:

Oh but WG says the population isn't big enough. it would make que times awful.

There's enough players to gamble with this CV crap though apparently.

Apparently.

The massive paradigm shift coming with 8.0 seems to be a calculated risk. Speeding up matches and dumbing-down aspects of game play are apt to draw in more short attention-span, instant gratification type players at the risk of alienating a segment of the existing base.

Time will show the wiser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,981 posts
6,704 battles
7 hours ago, usspaul3 said:

well i would love for them to do that but the chances of that ever happening is very slim. Specially considering how there are way to many people on these forums that keep insisting that mm is fine. Despite the fact that the most common threads is all about mm and how they complain about being bottom tier. Its one of the biggest complains about this game and the cause of a lot of people quiting the game. Yet you will keep seeing the same folks clamor on saying mm is fine. I can deal with it, but even I get sick of the mm and stop playing for weeks before i start playing again.

Threads in the forums really don't mean much - if you go by them then all of these items are true as well:

 

1.  Every ship type is OP.

2. Smoke ruins games and is OP.

3. Radar is OP and ruins games.

4.  CVs are cancer and should not be in the game.

5.  Torps are OP and should be removed.

6.  Hacks abound........ just because and ruin the game.

7.  HE meta ruins the game.

8.  MM cheats and puts people with the worst teams ever game (bit long thread on this already from the weekend.

By definition all of the above drive players away even though - the population has been pretty stable over the last 2 years or so.  Go to +/- 1 tier and people will still complain about MM and how it is inherently unfair.

Also understand - +/- 1 would get more casual players to stick around and a good chunk of the players base does not want casual players to stick around.  I wold hazard to guess that the biggest reason people leave is not +/- 1, but the player base who doesn't want casual players in the game.  Casual players get berated in the game and in the forums, because they don't take the game seriously enough.

Edited by CylonRed
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,442 posts
8,845 battles
7 hours ago, Navalpride33 said:

IT will also give relief of the tier 8 ship players who face tier 10 BB God ships. So yes I say nerf ships so that the current MM is fair.

Personally, I'm a bit tired of hearing about how bad it is that T8's face 10's, and are always bottom tiered... Because I seem to face a lot of T8's in my Leander, so.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,171
[CNO]
[CNO]
Members
4,213 posts
13,813 battles
8 hours ago, usspaul3 said:

well i would love for them to do that but the chances of that ever happening is very slim. Specially considering how there are way to many people on these forums that keep insisting that mm is fine. Despite the fact that the most common threads is all about mm and how they complain about being bottom tier. Its one of the biggest complains about this game and the cause of a lot of people quiting the game. Yet you will keep seeing the same folks clamor on saying mm is fine. I can deal with it, but even I get sick of the mm and stop playing for weeks before i start playing again.

MM is fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
198
[CSM]
[CSM]
Members
424 posts
4,267 battles
2 hours ago, CylonRed said:

Threads in the forums really don't mean much - if you go by them then all of these items are true as well:

 

1.  Every ship type is OP.

2. Smoke ruins games and is OP.

3. Radar is OP and ruins games.

4.  CVs are cancer and should not be in the game.

5.  Torps are OP and should be removed.

6.  Hacks abound........ just because and ruin the game.

7.  HE meta ruins the game.

8.  MM cheats and puts people with the worst teams ever game (bit long thread on this already from the weekend.

By definition all of the above drive players away even though - the population has been pretty stable over the last 2 years or so.  Go to +/- 1 tier and people will still complain about MM and how it is inherently unfair.

Also understand - +/- 1 would get more casual players to stick around and a good chunk of the players base does not want casual players to stick around.  I wold hazard to guess that the biggest reason people leave is not +/- 1, but the player base who doesn't want casual players in the game.  Casual players get berated in the game and in the forums, because they don't take the game seriously enough.

How about +/-1 for just t10 ships, dven if it means 6vs6 or 10vs10 etc. For t10.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
120
[CUTE]
Members
252 posts
13,582 battles
9 hours ago, Navalpride33 said:

How about, not making ships so over capable to where the -/+2 MM is no longer an issue because of it? That way, a bottom tier has or in a specified range. The same reasonable capabilities then a ship two tiers up or two tiers below. 

 

IMO ^^^ is an easy fix.

Bottom tier ships (T8 in a T10 match as example since thats what people complain about most) are still able to perform reasonably well if played correctly. (ie, not rushing in head first into the enemy fleet and getting shot to crap)  As a bottom tier ship you have to be extra mindful of your position and when you engage.  Engagements should be done on your terms and not the enemy team.  Have friendly ships around etc. 

Lets remember that this is NOT world of tanks where being bottom tier can mean you are 100% incapable of dealing damage. Tier 8 ships playing against T10 also get a bonus to credits  and xp for dealing damage to higher tiered ships.  

To the players: Stop whining about being bottom tier. It happens.  Its not going away. Get used to it and just play the game. You aren't going to face favorable match making every battle(Being a T8 top tier beating up T6 ships).  Don't like being bottom tier? Play T10 ships or T1. 

Edited by Hatsuzuki_DD
  • Cool 2
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,171
[CNO]
[CNO]
Members
4,213 posts
13,813 battles
On 1/15/2019 at 8:56 AM, Hatsuzuki_DD said:

Bottom tier ships (T8 in a T10 match as example since thats what people complain about most) are still able to perform reasonably well if played correctly. (ie, not rushing in head first into the enemy fleet and getting shot to crap)  As a bottom tier ship you have to be extra mindful of your position and when you engage.  Engagements should be done on your terms and not the enemy team.  Have friendly ships around etc. 

Lets remember that this is NOT world of tanks where being bottom tier can mean you are 100% incapable of dealing damage. Tier 8 ships playing against T10 also get a bonus to credits  and xp for dealing damage to higher tiered ships.  

To the players: Stop whining about being bottom tier. It happens.  Its not going away. Get used to it and just play the game. You aren't going to face favorable match making every battle(Being a T8 top tier beating up T6 ships).  Don't like being bottom tier? Play T10 ships or T1. 

Agree.  Very true!

I never feel inadequate when bottom tier.  As you note, engage on YOUR terms, not the enemy's terms.  My approach to a match in a bottom tier is very different than when top tier.  Each type of match requires a different style.   When top tier, I can often act like a bully.  When bottom tier, I must find an asymmetric advantage.  Play to my strengths....work against the enemy's weaknesses.

As for being top tier.  With top tier, comes responsibility.  I'm EXPECTED to carry my top tier weight.  I'm EXPECTED to make a top tier contribution.  In general, if I'm not in the top three at the end, I didn't carry my weight.  I say in general, because carrying weight isn't always measured by the XP metric.  Sometimes a top tier player can land in the middle XP wise but still play in a manner that significantly helps the win. But, outside those exceptions, if I'm not in the top three...I didn't perform to expectations.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
551
[KRAK]
Members
2,015 posts
14,724 battles
On ‎1‎/‎15‎/‎2019 at 2:45 AM, ReddNekk said:

The playerbase would very likely be bigger if it wasn't for the +2 -2 MM.

I doubt it. People would still complain if bottom tier. I see T8 ships do well in T10 matches all the time and there are way less T8 ships in T10 matches as well since the changes were made. Now you rarely see more than one or two T8 in T10 matches per side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,240
Members
4,094 posts
15,015 battles
10 minutes ago, Vaffu said:

I doubt it. People would still complain if bottom tier. I see T8 ships do well in T10 matches all the time and there are way less T8 ships in T10 matches as well since the changes were made. Now you rarely see more than one or two T8 in T10 matches per side.

And that's the problem; Being the one or two tier 8s in a tier 10 battle. Tier 8s are badly outclassed by tier 10s, especially Cruisers. They're nothing but stat fodder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×