Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Bunda369

Should the preferential MM for tiers 3 & 4 be rescinded?

Should the preferential MM for tiers 3 & 4 be rescinded?  

39 members have voted

  1. 1. Should we go back to -2/+2 for all tiers except tier 1?


21 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
205 posts
5,305 battles

Finally there is a heavy discussion thread about this in one of the regional forums (US ... perhaps the EU guys will start one as well).

 

Respected members of their community like Lert (a supertester and LIttleWhiteMouse co-reviewer of ships) and Pope_Shizzle (one of the best players in any server ... the very definition of unicum) are asking for the current restricted MM for tiers 3 & 4 be reverted back to what it was before update 0.5.9.

 

Basically, they, and I agree with them, that it has become very tedious to play tiers 5 & 6, coz in the majority of games you are usually lowest tier in the match. Imagine if it has become tedious and unfun for them, what more for us potato and new(ish) players? Especially for the new players. Tier 5 would be a culture shock for them, and most likely make them want to quit. And, we don't want anyone to quit due to MM problems, do we?

 

Is it time for us to make our opinions known, and hopefully for WG to take them into consideration? What do you guys think? Do you guys have any suggestions on how to make the MM better for everyone involved, both new(ish) and experienced players?

 

I like Pope's suggestion that instead of restricted MM, new(ish) players with 350 games or less (or whatever the number should be), can be coralled together as they are the ones that WG is trying to protect with the current restricted MM.

Edited by Bunda369

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
783 posts
4,810 battles

I voted no, simply for the fact that for T2/3/4 ships, the +2 tier gap performance is much more glaring. At the very least, being in a T5 ship against a T7 ship is more manageable than a T4 ship against a T6 ship.

Don't get me wrong, being a T5 in a max T7 match isn't always fun and you'll hardly be the best contributor for the team, but rescinding the preferential MM for tiers 3 and 4 is simply not gonna cut it. Maybe a solution like: "In a T5-7 match, only a max of 3-4 T7s should be on each team." or something along those lines even though it does place another burden for MM and may result into more T7-9 matches. All I know is that if it is brought back to how it used to be, the 'victims' of MM will simply go down a tier or two. There's also the sandbox solution which you mentioned. Sadly, it is kind of bad in the long run.

From personal experience, I tried the EU server and there's like a sandbox of 30 games or so for new players. As someone who already knew how to play the game, the games I had during the sandbox period were glaringly different from the normal games I had. So it introduces another form of "shock" you wish to avoid with easing up on T5 matchmaking.

EDIT: And Mouse loves her Warspite so much to see it suffer. It isn't exactly the best ship to bring to a T8 match.

Edited by SZYZWY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,162 posts

Nah, its pretty good. T5 vs T7 is still manageable. Just the T5s need to grouped together with the flagship.

 

T5 vs T3 the power level is way too skewed. Like Omaha/Furutaka vs Tenryu? Kawachi vs New York/Kongo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,500 posts
1,535 battles

That would mean playing on atrocious maps like Neighbours or Trident with my tier IV ships.

Maps which quite literally are the very reason I don't play a lot of tier V-VI ships these days.

 

So no thanks, right now tier IV is my gold spot where I can have fun playing the game.

- Ships are generally balanced unlike tier VII+

- Combat is fun and arcadey (read: fast past)

- Offensive and defensive playstyles are effective

- The maps are all decently balanced towards ships and playstyles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
358 posts
7,415 battles

Frankly the only real exemption to +1-1 could possibly be the Clemson apart from that there's no ship that outperforms above it's tier. Since I can only call one ship as an exemption then I'd have to say no and that's still a possible exemption for Clemson it's good but against an entire team of higher tiers it won't last that long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
350 posts

 

EDIT: And Mouse loves her Warspite so much to see it suffer. It isn't exactly the best ship to bring to a T8 match.

 

 

I feel the same whenever my Warsprite or Cleaveland ends up dueling with a Tirpitz or Atago.

 

@ topic - I voted no as the difference in ship capabilities between Tiers 3 and 5 are great enough for the players in the lower tiers to actually quit and believe me, there were plenty of topics here in the forums that wanted this preferential MM made by salty Tier 3 players who could not even adapt to Tier 5 play styles months ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
181 posts
4,257 battles

Nerf the Kongo's range and lower tiers can better adapt with tier V. Seriously a range of 21.2km and that too in a ship whose sisters Hiei, Haruna, etc can be found in anyone's port, the sheer population of such ships make it hell for lower tier ships.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
205 posts
5,305 battles

The response between the SEA server and the US server is like night and day. They would like it reverted to as before update 0.5.9, or have all tiers have -1/+1 MM. Perhaps because they have a lot of premiums they bought at tiers 5 & 6? Should I add a second question as to whether ALL tiers should be -1/+1 in MM?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,500 posts
1,535 battles

The response between the SEA server and the US server is like night and day. They would like it reverted to as before update 0.5.9, or have all tiers have -1/+1 MM. Perhaps because they have a lot of premiums they bought at tiers 5 & 6? Should I add a second question as to whether ALL tiers should be -1/+1 in MM?

 

I'd rather have the game balance changed than just do a placebo "Everyone's a special child now" +-1mm for all tiers.

However these changes I have in mind would be 100% unrealistic (as in "That's not how it is irl") and I have this feeling that WG

is still trying hard to please the "But my realism in my arcade game!" audience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
783 posts
4,810 battles

The response between the SEA server and the US server is like night and day. They would like it reverted to as before update 0.5.9, or have all tiers have -1/+1 MM. Perhaps because they have a lot of premiums they bought at tiers 5 & 6? Should I add a second question as to whether ALL tiers should be -1/+1 in MM?

 

You can add the option. To be honest I'd prefer -1/+1 in MM but it's fairly impractical to implement for now, and I do like the variability in the types of opponents I face even if I get stomped. Sure, on our prime hours in the server it's good, but we have to consider low valleys in the population too. Maybe on EU and RU it can be, but even they have low hours of only 2-3k players for 5-6 hours of the day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
205 posts
5,305 battles

I was gonna add the question if our players would prefer -1/+1 MM for all tiers, but I figure that is a no go area for WG. In any case, in the US forum the respected members over there figure that a -1/+1 MM is a non starter when it comes to WG.

 

Do you guys have any ideas on how to solve the tier 5 & 6 MM problem? Seems like the fun tier to farm credits (aka seal clubbing) is now tier 4 ... which is not bad. The maps are smaller, battles are faster and closer together. And, there are some very nice ships at that tier ... Kaiser, Wyoming, Kuma, Isokaze, Clemson, Izyaslav, Langley, etc. Not to mention that abomination called Imperator-what's-its-name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
783 posts
4,810 battles

Do you guys have any ideas on how to solve the tier 5 & 6 MM problem? Seems like the fun tier to farm credits (aka seal clubbing) is now tier 4 ... which is not bad. The maps are smaller, battles are faster and closer together. And, there are some very nice ships at that tier ... Kaiser, Wyoming, Kuma, Isokaze, Clemson, Izyaslav, Langley, etc. Not to mention that abomination called Imperator-what's-its-name.

 

Other than full uniformity of -2/+2 or -1/+1 MM throughout, there will always be a problem tier. I admit being biased because my experience with T5 ships show that they can 'handle' T7s quite fine and being bottom tiered is actually a good thing in a rewards point of view. Like how Myokos will still fear Kongos, no Nagato(and even Scharnhorst) would like being hounded by Minekazes, Nicholas still being able to face most DDs fairly equally in knife fights and things like that.

 

The same goes for T6-T8 games although the T7-T8 power gap is quite generally better than the T6-T7 gap.

 

As for the latter part, you are right in your assessment that T4 is the way to go if you do not like being bottom tiered most of the time. A lot of decent ships in the matchups too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,500 posts
1,535 battles

Do you guys have any ideas on how to solve the tier 5 & 6 MM problem?

 

Return to the +-2mm after:

 

- Firing ranges are adjusted along all tiers

I will seriously never understand why firing ranges were used as a balancing factor, the higher firing ranges right now only mean two things.

For one they make the average 08/15 player think that they should prolly stay further away from their target.

And the more important point being that they make offensive playstyles far more difficult due to often ending up being shot from several directions.

 

Firing ranges need to be cut down across the board together with other changes to game mechanics and statistics, some of which

I'll mention below.

 

And for those people who like to point out that it's difficult to hit targets on long range, ask Evyl about that.

Plus:

 

 And I'm not even a good player, the good players in WoWS hit far more often at long range.

 

OhRdTjB.png

 

- Map changes/removal for certain maps

Two Brothers, Trident, Neighbours, just to name a few that all enhance the above mentioned issue with firing ranges.

On a lot of low tier maps and very few high tier maps cover is used to cut the map into several parts, even with higher firing range it's

often impossible to shoot advancing enemies on the other side of the map due to obstacles.

Meanwhile on mid/high tier maps the opposite takes place, there's often hardly any cover to utilise unless you want to hide behind an island

and play peek-a-boo.

 

- Spotting mechanics

I'm going to write it, people won't like it, but it's a simple truth that the minimum spotting range right now is way too short.

Sailing against a DD with my BB feels like driving with a Grille SPG around in WoT beta.

 

Back in WoT's beta a heavy tank had two chances of spotting a Grille:

  1. It's a bad player sitting in the open
  2. The Grille is firing from below 50(!) meters
  3. The heavy tank just rammed it

 

You see, there was no minimum spotting distance and the Grille being one of the tanks with the highest camo factor

translated into a fairly hopeless situation for the heavy.

And the Grille is just an example, way back then after the addition of US SPGs I used my M7 Priest to stop and destroy 2 KV-1 tanks.

On my own, sitting in a bush about 150m in front of them, every shot dealt some damage and kept them tracked.

10/10 gameplay am I right?

 

Now returning to WoWS, DDs stay invisible against BBs for way too long.

I know that there was a statement a while ago that invis-firing is working as intended, and on long range that's fine.

However on short range firing or even just being there should get the DD spotted.

 

Same for cruisers that stay invisible at around 10km range.

These aren't good game mechanics, because they're way too easy to abuse.

Not to mention that it's basically boxing players into this one build where you put everything you can into being as stealthy as possible.

Including a tier V skill that takes forever to reach for the average player.

 

Which brings me to another, unrelated to the discussion, issue of how badly weighted the captain's skills are

compared to WoT's crew skills, but for the discussion's sake I'll stay on topic.

 

So what else is there that's currently out of whack in WoWS?

Simply said, a lot.

I haven't even scratched the surface and just to mention a few quickly, because this already has become a wall of flesh text:

 

- Premium consumables (Example: Repair, Smoke) are a must have

- Everything about carriers (From control responsiveness to general game mechanics)

- Some stock ships are just way too weak

- General balancing issues that mostly manifest themselves in tiers VII and higher (Often already exist to a lesser degree on lower tiers)

- Gun dispersion is still a bit wonky to the point where shots fly into space (slightly exaggerated) even when firing at

a target at close range

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,452 posts
2,950 battles

Now returning to WoWS, DDs stay invisible against BBs for way too long.

I know that there was a statement a while ago that invis-firing is working as intended, and on long range that's fine.

However on short range firing or even just being there should get the DD spotted.

 

Even with CE, a DD can only invisifire no closer than 9km. That is not short-ranged. Unless of course you mean smoke, then it's excusable regardless of range.

 

Same for cruisers that stay invisible at around 10km range.

These aren't good game mechanics, because they're way too easy to abuse.

Not to mention that it's basically boxing players into this one build where you put everything you can into being as stealthy as possible.

Including a tier V skill that takes forever to reach for the average player.

 

CAs can only stay invisible at 9-10km, even with CE+Upgrade, and only invisifire from ranges 15km+

Too easy to abuse? So everyone runs CE on low tiers? You sure it isn't some 1% of the pop that actually has a 15pt captain to begin with?

 

So what else is there that's currently out of whack in WoWS?

Simply said, a lot.

I haven't even scratched the surface and just to mention a few quickly, because this already has become a wall of flesh text:

 

- Premium consumables (Example: Repair, Smoke) are a must have

 

What? No. I mean, I never run premium anything and look at my personal record. Is it any different from an above-average player? Oh, oh. Does that mean I'll be unicum if I start spending on prems?

 

- Everything about carriers (From control responsiveness to general game mechanics)

 

How terribly precise. If you mean UI controls, then I agree with you. But mechanics? Be more specific.

 

- Some stock ships are just way too weak

 

Be more precise.

 

- General balancing issues that mostly manifest themselves in tiers VII and higher (Often already exist to a lesser degree on lower tiers)

 

Be more precise. National lines often have the advantage in something.

 

- Gun dispersion is still a bit wonky to the point where shots fly into space (slightly exaggerated) even when firing at a target at close range

 

Is that even related to tiering?

 

You've deviated from the tier 3-4 topic.

 

And please don't ever compare WoT to WoWS when it comes to gameplay mechanics.

Use WoWS metaphors for WoWS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,500 posts
1,535 battles

Even with CE, a DD can only invisifire no closer than 9km. That is not short-ranged. Unless of course you mean smoke, then it's excusable regardless of range.

 

At that range a DD also hits with every gun without any repercussions, not to mention being unspottable when not firing and just launching torpedoes.

 

And yes, smoke spotting range is also way too low, considering that offensive playstyles with the current effective firing ranges and map layouts

mean that a BB/CA can't simply turn away from smoke without a high risk of getting broadside AP hits.

 

Now it wouldn't matter much if the aforementioned issues you left out were changed, but that isn't the case right now.

 

 CAs can only stay invisible at 9-10km, even with CE+Upgrade, and only invisifire from ranges 15km+

 

That's what I wrote... a CA staying invisible at that range gives it all the cards to change the flow of the engagement in it's way.

Not to mention that it's pretty easy to hit a BB at those ranges.

Theoretically a nice idea, if there were other ways to min-max playstyles in general, but nope.

Spotting and concealment are pretty much the most important things right now and not going for a build/playstyle that promotes it hurts the performance.

 

 Too easy to abuse? So everyone runs CE on low tiers? You sure it isn't some 1% of the pop that actually has a 15pt captain to begin with?

 

Read, think, reply.

That statement is on general tiers not restricted to the above mentioned.

And it's not restricted to captain's skills, in fact, it's just one additional point I mentioned.

 


Nvm that it's not one month post release anymore and the number of people running around with tier V skills has increased.

Plus "Hey, it's totally fine, only a few people are exploiting the stuff that basically makes them unbeatable."


 

Take the good old chap Umikaze for example.

A tier III cruiser spots me once I go below 6km, without anything that boosts my camo.

Now you could argue that it's fine since Umikaze's torpedo range is only 8km.

However, 6km minimum spotting range on a cruiser basically means that I can sail scots free and launch torpedoes into all directions.

 

And the same goes on throughout all tiers, visibility is king, as it once was in WoT and to a degree still is.

 

What? No.

 

No?

Having Repair and Damage Control ready twice as often as the opposing BB isn't a must have?

Equipping a flag that actually gives Repair +20% health repaired (in the same time no less) isn't a must have?

 

Of course it isn't... what was I thinking.

 

Be more specific.

Be more precise.

Be more precise.

I haven't even scratched the surface and just to mention a few quickly, because this already has become a wall of flesh text:

...

 

How terrible.

 

 Is that even related to tiering?

 

Directly, no.

However just like the other things I've mentioned and those I haven't touched upon it has an indirect impact on it,

because surprisingly it's not a single issue that's the main reason for a +-1mm on low tiers.

 

And please don't ever compare WoT to WoWS when it comes to gameplay mechanics.

Use WoWS metaphors for WoWS.

 

Thank you, but I'll draw my comparisons where I see fit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,452 posts
2,950 battles

 

At that range a DD also hits with every gun without any repercussions, not to mention being unspottable when not firing and just launching torpedoes.

 

Hits.

IJN rate of fire (Can only fire every 7 or so seconds while needing another 8 seconds for the shells to hit)

SN camouflage (Must invisifire at longer range)

USN shell velocity (Feels like you're sniping at 12km with the time it takes to reach the target)

 

And yes, smoke spotting range is also way too low, considering that offensive playstyles with the current effective firing ranges and map layouts

mean that a BB/CA can't simply turn away from smoke without a high risk of getting broadside AP hits.

 

Being invisifired by a DD in smoke is literally no biggie. Between getting shot in the broadside with AP and getting plinked off with HE rounds from a stationary target, you'd worry more of the AP than some guy who struggles to get the perfect shot on thin parts of your armor to do even scratch damage.

They are a distraction that actually needs time to actually do damage compared to larger ships. If they spend time on you, that's less time spent on caps- Literally a DD's primary duty.

 

That's what I wrote... a CA staying invisible at that range gives it all the cards to change the flow of the engagement in it's way.

Not to mention that it's pretty easy to hit a BB at those ranges.

Theoretically a nice idea, if there were other ways to min-max playstyles in general, but nope.

Spotting and concealment are pretty much the most important things right now and not going for a build/playstyle that promotes it hurts the performance.

 

It's also pretty easy to delete a cruiser that popped up close to a battleship. Overmatch, anyone?

What do you mean it's easy to hit a battleship? Anything at 9-10km can hit a battleship. It's a large target.

Have all the cards? It's literally just an ambush. After it's spotted, there goes its element of surprise. Oh? So it stopped firing? Wellp, better engage another target, then.

 

Read, think, reply.

That statement is on general tiers not restricted to the above mentioned.

And it's not restricted to captain's skills, in fact, it's just one additional point I mentioned.

 

I could frankly say the same:

 

- Spotting mechanics

----

 

Same for cruisers that stay invisible at around 10km range.

These aren't good game mechanics, because they're way too easy to abuse.

Not to mention that it's basically boxing players into this one build where you put everything you can into being as stealthy as possible.

Including a tier V skill that takes forever to reach for the average player.

 

Why are you talking about spotting mechanics in a thread regarding T3-4 preferential matchmaking?

 

Read. Think. Reply.


Nvm that it's not one month post release anymore and the number of people running around with tier V skills has increased.

Plus "Hey, it's totally fine, only a few people are exploiting the stuff that basically makes them unbeatable."


Oh you're right. CE makes people unbeatable.

I'm sorry, but I'm finding you less credible after that statement.

 

Yes, sure. You can broadly state that the number of people with T5 skills has increased. It is true.

 

I admit that.

 

But they are still in the minority group.

And not every DD picks AFT for stealthfiring; There's DE or SE, or a combination of the 3 if they think CE is not worth it.

 

Take the good old chap Umikaze for example.

A tier III cruiser spots me once I go below 6km, without anything that boosts my camo.

Now you could argue that it's fine since Umikaze's torpedo range is only 8km.

However, 6km minimum spotting range on a cruiser basically means that I can sail scots free and launch torpedoes into all directions.

 

The same could be said for Minekaze with its 6km detection and only 7km torps. Does the camouflage make it OP?

No.

 

Umikaze's performance better than other destroyers with its concealment?

No.

 

No?

Having Repair and Damage Control ready twice as often as the opposing BB isn't a must have?

Equipping a flag that actually gives Repair +20% health repaired (in the same time no less) isn't a must have?

Of course it isn't... what was I thinking.

 

A must have? 

Dear sir, you are clearly spoiled.

 

It's certainly nice to have. but you don't need it if you play smart.

 

I literally never run any premium consumables. I'd gladly take superintendent instead if I found a need for it. I don't even run SI on my DDs- Only vigilance.

 

 xuQSjaq.png

wNObnp0.png

 

How terrible.

 

... Of you to deviate from the topic.

 

Directly, no.

However just like the other things I've mentioned and those I haven't touched upon it has an indirect impact on it,

because surprisingly it's not a single issue that's the main reason for a +-1mm on low tiers.

 

So all of this isn't relevant.

 

Thank you, but I'll draw my comparisons where I see fit.

 

They're both under Wargaming, but they're different games.

Different games, different mechanics.

Just because they share a name under the same company does not make them relevant to each other.

 

I sincerely wish you wouldn't introduce a topic that isn't so relevant for the thread.

 

Oh well.

 

Kindly ignore me and continue with the discussion regarding preferential MM.

Edited by Stein_Grenadier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×