28 Shadow_Wolf7 Members 85 posts 4,809 battles Report post #1 Posted January 4, 2021 In the process of getting the snowflakes from all my ships I really enjoyed some of the lower tier ships I have from lines I haven't grinded yet or lower tier premiums I have. The issue is that these lower tier matches either have new players, or bots and so don't feel as exciting and tense as higher tier MM. There are some really fun Tier 5 or 6 ships that I still enjoy playing (just as much as my tier 8,9, and 10's) but I feel like the battles themselves aren't as fun. This could be fixed with a better MM that took skill into consideration but I don't claim to understand game development so have no idea on how complicated this would be. On the other hand, an easy thing to do is to make a ranked season or ranked sprint at lower tiers. Even with the new ranked format we are getting tiers 8,9, and 10. Why not at lower tiers? I also think it could be cool to even shift tiers drastically with the bronze, silver, and gold leagues being tier 8, then tier 5, and then tier 10 or something. I may be alone on this but wanted to put it out there for discussion. 2 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
6,776 [SIM] SkaerKrow Members 6,307 posts 10,286 battles Report post #2 Posted January 4, 2021 Tier V is a hellhole for balance, with Giulio Cesare, the Kamikaze sisters, and Gremyaschchy mucking things up. Tier VI would be far more tenable for low-tier ranked. 1 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
181 [-NT-] celticboy27 Members 211 posts 5,498 battles Report post #3 Posted January 4, 2021 (edited) 56 minutes ago, SkaerKrow said: Tier V is a hellhole for balance, with Giulio Cesare, the Kamikaze sisters, and Gremyaschchy mucking things up. Tier VI would be far more tenable for low-tier ranked. Same could be said with FDR and M. Richthofen at X, Enterprise and Massachusetts at VIII, Belfast at VII, and E. Lowenheart at VI. It’d be nice to each player to get the chance, even less often, to play their favorite tier (V and above) for the Ranked rewards. High tier Ranked is stagnant - same old “ship” over and over again - and it’ll feel even more boring since Ranked is going to be a near continuous thing now. Edited January 4, 2021 by celticboy27 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
6,776 [SIM] SkaerKrow Members 6,307 posts 10,286 battles Report post #4 Posted January 4, 2021 38 minutes ago, celticboy27 said: Same could be said with FDR and M. Richthofen at X, Enterprise and Massachusetts at VIII, Belfast at VII, and E. Lowenheart at VI. First off, grouping Lowenhardt with those other ships is questionable. Secondly, you’re talking about one or two ships at those other tiers, where there are five at tier V. It’s not even remotely comparable. WG tried tier V ranked at one point, and it was a disaster. 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
12,780 [SALVO] ArIskandir Members 18,094 posts 10,709 battles Report post #5 Posted January 4, 2021 1 hour ago, SkaerKrow said: Tier V is a hellhole for balance, with Giulio Cesare, the Kamikaze sisters, and Gremyaschchy mucking things up. Tier VI would be far more tenable for low-tier ranked. I would gladly change matching against Giulio, Kami and Gremy in exchange for clear skies. Heck I would even play Omaha if it means no flying monkeys. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
275 [KRAK] Ericson38 Members 1,960 posts 19,900 battles Report post #6 Posted January 4, 2021 2 hours ago, ArIskandir said: I would gladly change matching against Giulio, Kami and Gremy in exchange for clear skies. Heck I would even play Omaha if it means no flying monkeys. Those were the good old days. I remember when I saw my 1st Cleveland, in a battle I was low tier in. How grand it looked, 5 years ago. And Omaha was a blast back then. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
