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

Tier difference... please...

48 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[AUSNZ]
Member
420 posts
16,015 battles

TBH i feel we should get +-3 MM as there is no reason that my Montana shouldn't be able to compete (Annihilate) Pensacola's every game :trollface:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LBAS]
Beta Tester
324 posts

looks like MT tier 7 meet HT tier 9 and can't do anything at tier 9 room and blame MM :trollface:

 

When there are plenty of things a tier 7 MT can do in that game. :trollface:

 

Too many spoiled brats people these days need specially looked after.

Edited by spixys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
754 posts
8,493 battles

So many snide anonymous cowards using the internet to say things in an underhanded manner that they would never say to someone's face assumptions.

 

A certain Jolly Wong posted a video of a Gneisusuissuuiiuiu who was last alive on team and chose to engage when there was no need.

His team was ahead on points.

All the Gneeiuusiiseiiu needed to do was fall back and let the timer tick over.

The Gneeisuuiisiieuu chose to engage - something that was unfair to the others on his team.

Jolly Wong (yes I know who it is...) suggested that there are "scrubs who would rather lose" and expressed displeasure via entertaining video effects.

 

This demonstrates my point and plea precisely.

 

The Gneeeisiissuueiiuuui was a T7 BB in a T5-T7 game.

In such a case, you need your highest tier ships to perform and not do things like the Gneeisuuuiisu did.

The Gneeisissu in that video probably only survived that long because he had the survivability of a T7 BB.

Yes there's plenty a -2 tier ship can do, of course there is, but not as much as the actual highest tier ship.

And yet I see this kind of thing - including highest tier ships just plain getting themselves executed for little or no contribution to team.

 

This would be mildly mitigated by a +/- 1 Tier difference maximum.

 

Yes there are good and bad players at any tier and at any time. Of course there are. You can't insure against that.

 

All I'm saying (and I know there is more than one side to this argument) and lending my voice too, is the +/- 1 argument.

 

Yes, maybe I have recently come across a lot of this and it just really got on my nerves lately - maybe.

 

Yes, I have many games that I lose for whatever reason but they are close games none the less and are entertaining.

 

BUT, I would still prefer to win and would like a fair chance to do this.

 

Thus my OP.

 

Share this post


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

I have red this kind of discussion for more than many in & outside the forum.

You complained being a lowest tier of the battle but you never complain if you are top tier of the battle, right?

If you are the lowest tier of the battle, STAY BEHIND THE FRONTLINE. SUPPORT YOUR TEAM.

Edited by Mingfang47

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24
[BRU]
Member
279 posts
2,079 battles

Had you posted the context right at the start of the thread, people wouldn't had assumed things.

 

The Gneeeisiissuueiiuuui was a T7 BB in a T5-T7 game.

In such a case, you need your highest tier ships to perform and not do things like the Gneeisuuuiisu did.

The Gneeisissu in that video probably only survived that long because he had the survivability of a T7 BB.

Yes there's plenty a -2 tier ship can do, of course there is, but not as much as the actual highest tier ship.

And yet I see this kind of thing - including highest tier ships just plain getting themselves executed for little or no contribution to team.

 

This would be mildly mitigated by a +/- 1 Tier difference maximum.

 

Not even a same tier game can remedy the existence of bad players. I bet you'll be just as pissed when you're in a tier 6 and a tier 7 ship decides to throw the win away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
754 posts
8,493 battles

Point is, I enjoy a wide variety of games and outcomes in World of Warships.

 

My LEAST entertaining games are ones in which the highest tier ships do not seem to pull their weight.

 

The greater the tier difference, the greater this effect is exacerbated.

 

Seems there are many who disagree. Fine. I still argue for a +/- 1 Tier difference.

 

I come across others in game all the time who feel the same way and express the same dismay when they find themselves in the third or fourth game in a row when they are -2 tiers.

 

It seems neither fun nor fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24
[BRU]
Member
279 posts
2,079 battles

EJL, did you read all of my post?

 

I didn't say it would solve it, I suggested it might mitigate.

 

I did. My point still stands, being, you'll be still be pissed off when a top tier ship decides to do just like what you've described even with +/-1 MM.

 

Though I understand that being on the bottom tier sucks if the top tiers/top dogs don't do well, and you have to pull off a hard carry to win.

 

same tier only please....

 

Kinda boring on the long run for me. Maybe for Ranked or (in the future) Clan Battles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LBAS]
Beta Tester
324 posts

 

I enjoyed the recent Tier 7 only ranked battles.

 

oh yeah, a.k.a. the weed smoking galore. Just like what OP had been smoking.

 

Git Gud then whining baby?

Edited by spixys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
802 posts

A certain Jolly Wong posted a video of a Gneisusuissuuiiuiu who was last alive on team and chose to engage when there was no need.

 

His team was ahead on points.

 

So changing MM will stop players making poor decisions? 

 

same tier only please....

 

People have issues with long match making queues as it is. Have fun at tier 10 and tier 2-3 battles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
754 posts
8,493 battles

 

oh yeah, a.k.a. the weed smoking galore. Just like what OP had been smoking.

 

Git Gud then whining baby?

 

Thank you for your well explained, well reasoned and thought provoking replies on this thread.

 

You have certainly made me deeply question my point of view and thoughts on this subject.

 

Your intelligence, good humour and knee slappingly hilarious wit are a marvel to behold.

 

Thank you for existing.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
754 posts
8,493 battles

 

So changing MM will stop players making poor decisions? 

 

 

People have issues with long match making queues as it is. Have fun at tier 10 and tier 2-3 battles.

 

Another Strawman.

Not once did I say that anything would change the occurrence of bad players and poor player decisions.

I specifically noted this.

Specifically.

 

I am only up to Tier 9 but I play all tiers.

 

I would happily wait longer if that's what implementing +/- 1 tiers would mean.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
754 posts
8,493 battles

I think you should be enjoying tier 9 and 10 since you will be on top of the foodchain most of the time.

 

Yes. I was relieved to enter Tier 9 as I (and my teammates on whom I rely) could not be outclassed by more than one tier.

(Though my sense is that T9/T10 needs good players anyway, so many ships can end so many other ships in one good salvo either 9->10 or 10->9).

It's not JUST that though. Players at 8+ tend towards a little more circumspect play in my experience and are less likely to wipe early (always get exceptions of course).

And yes, I look forward to Tier 10.

I would still vote for +/- 1 tier though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
802 posts

Another Strawman.

 

Not once did I say that anything would change the occurrence of bad players and poor player decisions.

 

So why list it as an example?

 

This demonstrates my point and plea precisely. (Here you've used this video to support your call for +1/-1 MM)

 

The Gneeeisiissuueiiuuui was a T7 BB in a T5-T7 game.

 

In such a case, you need your highest tier ships to perform and not do things like the Gneeisuuuiisu did.

 

The Gneeisissu in that video probably only survived that long because he had the survivability of a T7 BB.

 

Yes there's plenty a -2 tier ship can do, of course there is, but not as much as the actual highest tier ship.

 

And yet I see this kind of thing - including highest tier ships just plain getting themselves executed for little or no contribution to team.

 

This would be mildly mitigated by a +/- 1 Tier difference maximum. (..and now you're saying that +1/-1 MM will only slightly fix it)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
520 posts
11,127 battles

 

Yes. I was relieved to enter Tier 9 as I (and my teammates on whom I rely) could not be outclassed by more than one tier.

(Though my sense is that T9/T10 needs good players anyway, so many ships can end so many other ships in one good salvo either 9->10 or 10->9).

It's not JUST that though. Players at 8+ tend towards a little more circumspect play in my experience and are less likely to wipe early (always get exceptions of course).

And yes, I look forward to Tier 10.

I would still vote for +/- 1 tier though.

Good one.... But.. Believe it or not. Im sure you have noticed battles in tier 9 and 10 are more protracted compared to mid tier.

 

Most of my games are in tier 7.  This tier is mostly On the top of the mid tier food chain.  And if not, though I occasionally encounter tier 9... I dont see it as a problem since i know my boat is capable of handling tier 9 ships to a certain degree.

 

Tier 8 for me is the entry level to tier 9 and 10... So i jump as quick to 9 as possible.

Tier 5 and 6 have the worsr MM.   So i usually stay clear of that tier, unleas in a division.

 

Tier 4 is another Good tier that ends up in top of the Low Tier Food Chain...  Most ships are more then capable in handling tier 5 ships.

 

Thus, i play tier 4, 7, 9 and 10.  Knowing that i dont see any MM issues with these tiers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
754 posts
8,493 battles

 

So why list it as an example?

 

 

Because I am suggesting that the effect on the game of a bad player in a +2 tier ship is potentially more damaging to a team's chance of winning than a +1 tier ship.

 

I did not once say " wow if only there was only a 1 tier difference between ships in a battle then RNGesus would always bless me and everyone on my team would always make great tactical positioning decisions and always choose HE or AP at exactly the right time and my allied BB's would always properly angle their hulls and the allied DD's would always spot and cap when needed and the CV's would always scout and protect us from enemy torpedo bombers..."

 

Not once did I suggest this. All I am saying is that the negative effects of poor/bad/careless/noob players would be lessened with a +/- 1 tier cap and lead to a more entertaining game experience.

 

Or at least fewer bad experiences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×