Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
FB2000

Blowouts.... something need to change soon

54 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

25
[D33P6]
[D33P6]
Beta Testers
123 posts
12,104 battles

Being a loyal player since Beta I have found the game a lot less enjoyable lately. I have seen the same comments from some CCs, there are way too many blowouts since the last few patches. I do not mind losing in close battles because then I know the other team did well. What is getting me furious are those blowouts happening at high tiers... T10 is the worst. How many losses or win do I have now with one side have lost only 2-3 ships and the other side lost everything within 8-9 minutes. This is not fun for anyone even if you win. I know some changes in the matchmaker were done lately but something went amiss. I have a lot less fun since the blowouts started to be regular and it is pushing me to spend my time and $$$ in other games. I hope WG will take notice sooner than later otherwise my account will become inactive as my WoT did (FYI, I left WoT because of the toxicity).

  • Cool 7
  • Confused 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,030
[EQRN]
Members
2,030 posts
17,447 battles

How does WG guarantee blow outs occur “with recent MM changes”, and how do they guarantee blow outs never happen?  Inquiring minds want to know.  

From my, statistically small sample size, when games start to go south, for example down 2 ships or all DDs dying very early, other team members seem to throw in the towel and virtually suicide to get out of the match ASAP.  Not sure what WG can do about those attitudes.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,715
[SOFOP]
Members
2,439 posts
14,361 battles

I don't see it changing, even with massive matchmaker shifts.  Too many variables to try and balance games by matching up and balancing players.  Since WG is dead set against any major shifts in philosophy towards matchmaking (even extremely simple ones, like balancing specific ships across teams), I doubt its going to happen.  Steamrolls happen in ranked too, so its not a matter of using a ranking system to get better games either.

The only solution I can see is artificial ones...like a respawn mechanic (one ship respawns every 2 minutes or something) or a comeback mechanic (losing team gets buffs when ships die).  I think this might push a bit far into the "arcade" style than most people are comfy with though.

Edited by Old_Baldy_One

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,953
[TBW]
Members
10,287 posts
17,483 battles
21 minutes ago, RipNuN2 said:

Time for respawns and comeback mechanics right? :cap_win:

I never could understand respawns in a military game. Dungeons and Dragons maybe, but not in a military game.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,590
Members
6,621 posts
20,629 battles

Been keeping track of my games and in most cases the blowouts are due to bad DD play. Like chess, losing a pawn or two and getting nothing in return is huge loss and having to play defensively for the remainder of the game. It's so frustrating to watch some dd's play.....I know we are supposed to "adapt" but when you are perma spotted it gets real hard to adapt when your own dd's are on the one line or sitting behind a rock telling the team to support him.

Losing sucks, losing because players don't grasp 15% of the game... is really really frustrating when there are modes of play that they should be assigned to. AND they wouldn't know the difference if we simply took they :   : off of the bots names.

Having a 112 PR Hindenburg shoot his 6k torps at a 19k target after 8500 games makes you wonder why one would play this.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
372
[HMCSH]
Beta Testers
1,587 posts
19,583 battles

Yeah it is an odd thing...day before yesterday I couldn't win a game no matter what, then yesterday in the AM  the switch flipped

yesterday.JPGwith similar results in the evening. I fully expect the opposite to occur tonight!:cap_old:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
364
[KMS]
Beta Testers
291 posts
16,700 battles

You reminded me of my last ranked season where 6 people on my LOSING  team lived.

I went to an island near a cap to spot with my radar CA while our DD when to another cap.

REST of team sailed to back map edge and just waved while the DD and I were left unsupported and hanging in the wind to die.

never saw anything like it and that was the end of my playing ranked for that season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
372
[HMCSH]
Beta Testers
1,587 posts
19,583 battles
4 minutes ago, Waxing_Gibbous said:

Having a 112 PR Hindenburg shoot his 6k torps at a 19k target after 8500 games makes you wonder why one would play this.

Thursday night I watched a Shima try to torp another low health Shima 4.5 k away then miss with three full gun volleys at 2.5 km:cap_wander_2: in another match same night our tier 8 CV committed suicide (in a tier 10) game cause he figured why waste the time?

As it turned out him spotting:cap_look: in the end would have won the game.

Just a couple of the standouts .........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
730
[WOOKY]
Beta Testers
1,578 posts

this is in the nature of mathematics and not WG explicitly. once one point fails then all other points have increasingly higher chances to also fail and tends to lead to cascade failures, or blowouts, of 12-3 ship losses per team.

There is no game mechanics device that WG could implement, or meta shift of playstyles, that would change this. The only possibility is to increase the time frame between individual points of failure in the match, in order to lessen the impact of each ship loss on the overall match flow. Eg... double the map size and the game length... neither of which is particularly conducive to the quick and fun games that WG would like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,200
[--K--]
Members
1,343 posts
10,202 battles
18 minutes ago, SgtSpud said:

Yeah it is an odd thing...day before yesterday I couldn't win a game no matter what, then yesterday in the AM  the switch flipped

yesterday.JPGwith similar results in the evening. I fully expect the opposite to occur tonight!:cap_old:

You’re obviously superunicum and controlled all of those games, it had nothing to do with matchmaking...  right? 

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,590
Members
6,621 posts
20,629 battles
9 minutes ago, SgtSpud said:

Thursday night I watched a Shima try to torp another low health Shima 4.5 k away then miss with three full gun volleys at 2.5 km:cap_wander_2: in another match same night our tier 8 CV committed suicide (in a tier 10) game cause he figured why waste the time?

As it turned out him spotting:cap_look: in the end would have won the game.

Just a couple of the standouts .........

ya. First game today on Hotspot, dd "flanks" east giving away the cap and screams at me for camping in a cruiser with the hope of resetting the cap and not following him down the 10 line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
260
[TRU]
Members
602 posts
18,217 battles
19 minutes ago, Waxing_Gibbous said:

Been keeping track of my games and in most cases the blowouts are due to bad DD play. Like chess, losing a pawn or two and getting nothing in return is huge loss and having to play defensively for the remainder of the game. It's so frustrating to watch some dd's play.....I know we are supposed to "adapt" but when you are perma spotted it gets real hard to adapt when your own dd's are on the one line or sitting behind a rock telling the team to support him.

Losing sucks, losing because players don't grasp 15% of the game... is really really frustrating when there are modes of play that they should be assigned to. AND they wouldn't know the difference if we simply took they :   : off of the bots names.

Having a 112 PR Hindenburg shoot his 6k torps at a 19k target after 8500 games makes you wonder why one would play this.

 

Nail on the head.  Especially about the DD portion.  Watch your DDs sail into a no escape zone, get radared, leave their AA on, sit in smoke and take torps etc.  

DDs do have a rough job, but when you watch your friendly DDs do this you know the enemy smells more blood in the water.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,299
[VCRUZ]
Members
4,049 posts
9,180 battles

Yeah, this weak i had a streak of 14 blowouts in a row... yeah... not fun at all, just a waste of time and resources... One of the battles ended in 5 min 47 secs, none of the ships on my team died...

 

Unfortunately there is not much WG can do. This is a reflex of the player base, skill wise, the player base is just garbage. Most players are just worse than bots. They just get killed in dumb and fast ways. 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,263
[PVE]
Members
4,258 posts
18,597 battles
1 hour ago, FB2000 said:

Being a loyal player since Beta I have found the game a lot less enjoyable lately. I have seen the same comments from some CCs, there are way too many blowouts since the last few patches. I do not mind losing in close battles because then I know the other team did well. What is getting me furious are those blowouts happening at high tiers... T10 is the worst. How many losses or win do I have now with one side have lost only 2-3 ships and the other side lost everything within 8-9 minutes. This is not fun for anyone even if you win. I know some changes in the matchmaker were done lately but something went amiss. I have a lot less fun since the blowouts started to be regular and it is pushing me to spend my time and $$$ in other games. I hope WG will take notice sooner than later otherwise my account will become inactive as my WoT did (FYI, I left WoT because of the toxicity).

The solution is not obvious because the cause of the blowouts isn't the MM nor even skill as we envision it.  It's population densities or lack of them !  Look, games that are "cooperative shooters' need random distributions of players to "just function".  That 66% in the middle of the game are what stabilize games with an ELO or skill based MM process.   The game chooses ships and with those ships come skill.   If you have a normalized random distributed  population, at any tier you are going to get the entire middle of the match as average players....!   But, when the game becomes mature and the average players start to leave, as we have experienced with Update 8.0 and the PR event, that in-equity of people leaving the game cause MM holes !  And, with skill densities holes you then get radical cascading errors and cascading losses and wins........

The answer is to re establish the average player base !  And that, is a matter of time and the game not doing really stupid things..........which, won't happen in our lifetimes.

1 hour ago, FrodoFraggin said:

From my, statistically small sample size, when games start to go south, for example down 2 ships or all DDs dying very early, other team members seem to throw in the towel and virtually suicide to get out of the match ASAP.  Not sure what WG can do about those attitudes.

Again, it's all about the "holes" in the population !  They only way is to have a population that can support a simple MM !!!  Otherwise, as seen above, you get wins or losses in job lots depending on your luck !!!   There are no other choices that can be made by our host......  They are "reaping what they themselves have sow...."    No more and no less.....

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
372
[HMCSH]
Beta Testers
1,587 posts
19,583 battles
33 minutes ago, BarneyStyle said:

You’re obviously superunicum and controlled all of those games, it had nothing to do with matchmaking...  right? 

LOL as i stated...the night before was the exact opposite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,200
[--K--]
Members
1,343 posts
10,202 battles
4 minutes ago, SgtSpud said:

LOL as i stated...the night before was the exact opposite.

I know, had a bad night lastnight.  Bought Hindenburg and lost 5 straight.  Same thing happened when I bought Moskva, Repub, and Conq.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,379 posts
6,789 battles

This subject AGAIN?   No matter what the reasoned responses are WOWs will not change anything so whats the point other than ONLY talking or posting about it.   Sure its fun to read some posts which are quite interesting but in the end.....its just that...talk.  Don't see any dynamic shift in the game play dynamics UNLESS it affects revenue stream decline THEN you get WOWs attention real quick.   Until then...its futile.    Okay..click on the notification of your choice. 

  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27
[TARFU]
Members
37 posts
7,937 battles

Watching matchmaker monitor shows me that the best ranked players are always on the same side, which pretty much determines the outcome of the game before it started...

This is really aggravating to me because you can't complete daily chains without winning at least 6 battles... and if the outcome is predetermined, why even try?

This is why the game is bleeding players...

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,200
[--K--]
Members
1,343 posts
10,202 battles
52 minutes ago, admscotty said:

Watching matchmaker monitor shows me that the best ranked players are always on the same side, which pretty much determines the outcome of the game before it started...

This is really aggravating to me because you can't complete daily chains without winning at least 6 battles... and if the outcome is predetermined, why even try?

This is why the game is bleeding players...

I think I’ll player carriers if I’m going to lose 10 games a day.  PHUCK IT

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,293 posts
7,142 battles
59 minutes ago, admscotty said:

Watching matchmaker monitor shows me that the best ranked players are always on the same side, which pretty much determines the outcome of the game before it started...

This is really aggravating to me because you can't complete daily chains without winning at least 6 battles... and if the outcome is predetermined, why even try?

This is why the game is bleeding players...

You only need to win four battles to complete the daily chains. First two don't care about winning or losing. Also Co-Op is your friend if you just need guaranteed wins. 2-3 Co-Op games is generally all you need to clear 1,000 BXP and that's about the same amount of time as one Random battle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
305
[PROJX]
Beta Testers
728 posts
4,671 battles

I don't actually think that blowouts are purely due to player skill. 

I used to play a game called Armored Warfare, which was pretty much WOT with modern tanks. 

In that game's PvP, blowouts were extremely common, and not due to discrepancy in player skill. 

The real issue was that while from the front the tanks were strong, they had very weak side armor, which caused a losing team to lose harder. Not only that, but the lethality of the weapons systems grew much faster than armor. 

What I'm trying to say is there are so many ships nowadays that can kill another extremely quickly, and from very far away too. 

I think if range and damage were lowered across the board, then blowouts would be less likely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×