Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
snst

[Suggestion] Limit number of DDs per team

12 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

8
[BOTES]
Member
13 posts
4,388 battles

Take a look at this.

 

MLpyVhe.jpg

 

Let's not talk about the matchmaking because we do know it sometimes give balanced matchmaking sessions with its patented algorithm. I wanted to talk about DDs in this particular game session.

 

As you can see, we have a combination of 4 Kageros + 1 Shimakaze on the opposing side. It's a Standard game mode on Hotspot, meaning just base capping and team being split at the very start of the game. As you know, high-tier IJN DDs excel in area denial, which is probably why those that spawned away from the team's cap point decided to sail towards the base cap (typically most games have that side of the team push towards enemy base). Now here comes the 'fun' part. The middle of the map is pretty open, and it suits torp spam for area denial. How nice for a 4+1 IJN DD combo right? The result is what you see above. Will the outcome of the game be different if they pushed towards the enemy base instead? Possible, but highly unlikely.

 

Now back to DDs. Is it so difficult to restrict the number of DDs per team? CVs are being restricted to mirror matchup by tier and a maximum of two per team. I don't think it's impossible to implement the same for DDs. I'm suggesting the following:

 

  1. Maximum 3 DDs per team. In Domination mode, there are three cap points available, so it is only logical to have at least 3 DDs to contest cap points. You can still fill up a Division of 3 DDs without any problems.
  2. Mirrored tier. A Shima will always have to face another Shima or Gearing or Khabarovsk
  3. Mirrored number of DDs on the other team. Because 5 > 2+1

 

Feel free to give your opinions.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
784 posts
4,856 battles

Take a look at this.

 

MLpyVhe.jpg

 

Let's not talk about the matchmaking because we do know it sometimes give balanced matchmaking sessions with its patented algorithm. I wanted to talk about DDs in this particular game session.

 

As you can see, we have a combination of 4 Kageros + 1 Shimakaze on the opposing side. It's a Standard game mode on Hotspot, meaning just base capping and team being split at the very start of the game. As you know, high-tier IJN DDs excel in area denial, which is probably why those that spawned away from the team's cap point decided to sail towards the base cap (typically most games have that side of the team push towards enemy base). Now here comes the 'fun' part. The middle of the map is pretty open, and it suits torp spam for area denial. How nice for a 4+1 IJN DD combo right? The result is what you see above. Will the outcome of the game be different if they pushed towards the enemy base instead? Possible, but highly unlikely.

 

Now back to DDs. Is it so difficult to restrict the number of DDs per team? CVs are being restricted to mirror matchup by tier and a maximum of two per team. I don't think it's impossible to implement the same for DDs. I'm suggesting the following:

 

  1. Maximum 3 DDs per team. In Domination mode, there are three cap points available, so it is only logical to have at least 3 DDs to contest cap points. You can still fill up a Division of 3 DDs without any problems.
  2. Mirrored tier. A Shima will always have to face another Shima or Gearing or Khabarovsk
  3. Mirrored number of DDs on the other team. Because 5 > 2+1

 

Feel free to give your opinions.

 

 

 

They're already reworking how torps work for high tier IJN DD during the next patch.

(Reworking as in it gets detected earlier and slower so ultimately less impactful, can still be used for area denial though but isn't as rewarding)

I'd say we wait for how it impacts high tier gameplay first after implementation.

 

WG has made a statement about it in the "RU Q&A" that they do not want to 'limit' the number of DDs for each team and consider it as a last resort.

The reason being what we experience in world of cruisers, the relatively longer wait times for the class that gets limited. I don't know how the matchmaking algorithm works per se but that is the reason given.

If the first solution about the rework on torps doesn't work, they did state a plan B and until said plan fails, I don't see them limiting DD numbers anytime soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8
[BOTES]
Member
13 posts
4,388 battles

 

They're already reworking how torps work for high tier IJN DD during the next patch.

(Reworking as in it gets detected earlier and slower so ultimately less impactful, can still be used for area denial though but isn't as rewarding)

I'd say we wait for how it impacts high tier gameplay first after implementation.

 

WG has made a statement about it in the "RU Q&A" that they do not want to 'limit' the number of DDs for each team and consider it as a last resort.

The reason being what we experience in world of cruisers, the relatively longer wait times for the class that gets limited. I don't know how the matchmaking algorithm works per se but that is the reason given.

If the first solution about the rework on torps doesn't work, they did state a plan B and until said plan fails, I don't see them limiting DD numbers anytime soon.

 

I have tested the new torp options in the test server, and honestly they feel underwhelming. I believe most players will likely stick to the default 20km torps because they enable what Shima does best: area denial. The new torps will likely be useful in scenarios similarly found in Ranked Battle.

 

DDs' waiting time in queue is comparatively shorter than CVs though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
784 posts
4,856 battles

 

I have tested the new torp options in the test server, and honestly they feel underwhelming. I believe most players will likely stick to the default 20km torps because they enable what Shima does best: area denial. The new torps will likely be useful in scenarios similarly found in Ranked Battle.

 

DDs' waiting time in queue is comparatively shorter than CVs though.

 

I can certainly agree with that.

Clinging to the hope that if enough players take the shorter torps to see a change in gameplay overall then it isn't that bad a deal. The 20km torp nerfs seem enough to at least turn away a substantial number to go play the high tier IJN DD like Minekazes.

I don't like that kind of MM too(DD-heavy ones) just to clarify.:)

 

The CV waiting time is mostly because of the restrictions of both number limiting and mirroring. I can expect a noticeable increase in queue times for DDs if they were limited too, something around the time cruisers take when 100+ are in queue recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
216 posts
2,239 battles

I have tested the new torp options in the test server, and honestly they feel underwhelming. I believe most players will likely stick to the default 20km torps because they enable what Shima does best: area denial. The new torps will likely be useful in scenarios similarly found in Ranked Battle.

 

DDs' waiting time in queue is comparatively shorter than CVs though.

 

+1 for hard truth, doesn't matter if you see the torp wall at 1.7km or at 2.1km, both spell out a bad time and no change to over all game play for that ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,140 posts

I'll wait and see how thing turn out in next patch.

 

remember, If IJNDD torpedo can't hit it target, how they gonna gain credit?

DD can't gain credit form just scared enemy away you know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,725 posts

  1. Mirrored tier. A Shima will always have to face another Shima or Gearing or Khabarovsk
  2. Mirrored number of DDs on the other team. Because 5 > 2+1

 

Feel free to give your opinions.

 

The one you mentioned mirrored tier or mirror ship rule is already implemented. Because there was issue wherein there are majority of the same cruisers on one team than the other team, which 1 battle has too many undistributed Cleveland and few Aoba.

 

Now the challenge for that is the Matchmaker can't meet the rule's goal with few and uneven destroyers (e.g: many JP DD and mixed number of US & Soviet DD) in the queue.

 

I believe in that 5 DDs against 2 should be 3 vs 3 while the last destroyer that queued in should stay in the queue. 

For distributing the 3 Shimakaze & 3 Kagerou, that's the real challenge. It's gonna depends on the tier balancing of each team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8
[BOTES]
Member
13 posts
4,388 battles

 

The one you mentioned mirrored tier or mirror ship rule is already implemented. Because there was issue wherein there are majority of the same cruisers on one team than the other team, which 1 battle has too many undistributed Cleveland and few Aoba.

 

Now the challenge for that is the Matchmaker can't meet the rule's goal with few and uneven destroyers (e.g: many JP DD and mixed number of US & Soviet DD) in the queue.

 

I believe in that 5 DDs against 2 should be 3 vs 3 while the last destroyer that queued in should stay in the queue. 

For distributing the 3 Shimakaze & 3 Kagerou, that's the real challenge. It's gonna depends on the tier balancing of each team.

 

More often than not, the Matchmaker does not consistently follow its 'mirrored ship' mechanism. I believe another mechanism is taking priority, then again, I am not discussing about the Matchmaker.

 

If my suggestion is followed, you can have 3 DDs per team (2 Kagero and 1 Shimakaze), since there is a total of 3 Shimakazes, 4 Kageros and 1 Benson. The remaining Shimakaze and Benson can be matchmaked into another game session.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,725 posts

 

More often than not, the Matchmaker does not consistently follow its 'mirrored ship' mechanism. I believe another mechanism is taking priority, then again, I am not discussing about the Matchmaker.

 

If my suggestion is followed, you can have 3 DDs per team (2 Kagero and 1 Shimakaze), since there is a total of 3 Shimakazes, 4 Kageros and 1 Benson. The remaining Shimakaze and Benson can be matchmaked into another game session.

 

 

The one you mentioned mirrored tier or mirror ship rule is already implemented. Because there was issue wherein there are majority of the same cruisers on one team than the other team, which 1 battle has too many undistributed Cleveland and few Aoba.

 

Now the challenge for that is the Matchmaker can't meet the rule's goal with few and uneven destroyers (e.g: many JP DD and mixed number of US & Soviet DD) in the queue.

 

I believe in that 5 DDs against 2 should be 3 vs 3 while the last destroyer that queued in should stay in the queue. 

For distributing the 3 Shimakaze & 3 Kagerou, that's the real challenge. It's gonna depends on the tier balancing of each team.

 

Bold text is my answer to your concern, and let me rephrase that answer: Very few destroyers in the high-tier random battle queue. Can't achieved the matchmaking rule of mirror ship.

 

I wanna ask, how many destroyers are queued when you joined the queue with your New Orleans? Probably never reached beyond 9 destroyers, isn't it? Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

EDIT: The thing is on that suggestion, it gives additional time for players to find a battle. That's how the way I foresee on that suggestion.

Because currently in mid-tier and higher-tier battle, that's still an issue: the unequal distribution of destroyers on each team.

Edited by Mingfang47

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8
[BOTES]
Member
13 posts
4,388 battles

 

I wanna ask, how many destroyers are queued when you joined the queue with your New Orleans? Probably never reached beyond 9 destroyers, isn't it? Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

EDIT: The thing is on that suggestion, it gives additional time for players to find a battle. That's how the way I foresee on that suggestion.

Because currently in mid-tier and higher-tier battle, that's still an issue: the unequal distribution of destroyers on each team.

 

I don't have photographic memory, but anyway it doesn't look like it goes into double digit territory whenever I queue high tier.

 

Queuing time is a no-issue during primetime hours even with CVs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
629 posts
6,923 battles

I honestly don't see how the OP has made an argument for limited DD matchmaking.  The matchmaking in the screenshot shown is far more unbalanced in cruisers than in DD's. A Moskva and Roon vs a Des Moines, Hindenburg and Zao?  Perhaps they need to limit cruiser matchmaking because that is clearly unbalanced.  Or even better, they should limit BB matchmaking to max 2 per side since BB's are what cause cruisers to hang back for fear of a Yammy citadeling them from the other side of the map.

 

Or perhaps we could just let the match maker do it's thing as is and fix the root cause of why currently having 5 IJN DD's on your team makes for a less than fun experience for some of the opposition.  Which they are doing with the quite excellent changes to the high tier IJN DD's.  Quite simply, if you want to use long range torps for area denial, you have been significantly nerfed in both speed and detection range.  The shorter range torps will limit the amount of torps in the water at a time and enable IJN DD's to be more effectively countered, while giving the torp boats the chance to be very effective in the hands of a skilled captain.  Good changes all round that make the OP's point completely moot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
341 posts
2,790 battles

The problem isn't DDs being overpowered. It's the matchmaker being broken and failing to recognise divisions. This means that when you have a 3-man cruiser div, the MM will recognise that as a "group". This group will nullify the evenness in the classes, meaning the other team can have 2 more DDs than your team AND an extra BB. This isn't quite a big problem in low tiers but when you're in high tiers, the value of BBs and DDs are more important. 

 

Nerfing Shimakaze isn't even the problem as both Gearing and Kabab has higher WR than shima. If you really want to fix high tiers, start by giving us the 20% reduction to repairs that NA and RU server has as well as fixing the matchmaker by normalizing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×