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

0.5.0 Match Maker changes

53 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
2,040 posts
1,326 battles

So apparently this got posted on EU by WG staff, and I just have to inform it to us peeps here in SEA who don't really get much info from WG staffs. :hiding:

 

e20b489a-5b92-11e5-9b55-ac162d8bc1e4.png

 

Yes, your prayers have been answered, BB will no longer get +3 MM, it's +2 for most of them and +1 for Tier3-4 (Kawachi, Myogi, South Carolina, Wyoming and Arkansas). You can now RIP Steeltrap. :hiding:

 

Source: 

http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/30473-050-mm-changes/page__p__543944

 

P.S: In case you wondered, 0.5.0 patch is the release patch coming this Thursday.:honoring:

Edited by Gezeiten_Heimatwelt

Share this post


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

I get why the tier III BBs get the reduced MM (Although regular +-2 with making it impossible to get Ocean would've sufficed), but tier IV BBs?

 

Both Mighty Mio and Wyoming have the firepower to fight tier VI vessels... oh well, less complaining more seal clubbing~

 

QSEASOD.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,040 posts
1,326 battles

I get why the tier III BBs get the reduced MM (Although regular +-2 with making it impossible to get Ocean would've sufficed), but tier IV BBs?

 

Both Mighty Mio and Wyoming have the firepower to fight tier VI vessels... oh well, less complaining more seal clubbing~

 

 

The Myogi and Ishizuchi do need it, not the Arkansas/Wyoming though.

But oh well, we could just nerf those 2 T4 US BB to fit them with that preferential MM, oh wait we did... (not enough though, they need RoF nerf)

Share this post


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

The Myogi and Ishizuchi do need it, not the Arkansas/Wyoming though.

 

But Myogi is basically a Kongou without the 4th turret...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,040 posts
1,326 battles

 

But Myogi is basically a Kongou without the 4th turret...

 

With no armor and penetration upgrades.

Actually she doesn't lack the 4th turret, she lacks the 2nd turret which is worse.

 

Personally I feel the Ishizuchi is a better tier4 regular BB candidate, the Myogi being more unique should be premium.

Share this post


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

With no armor and penetration upgrades.

Actually she doesn't lack the 4th turret, she lacks the 2nd turret which is worse.

 

Dunno, I had no problems with either armor or penetration.

 

The single frontal turret wasn't great, but it's not like she's not maneuverable enough to turn into the enemy BB's salvo,

then turn to fire herself and get back into a fairly safe positioning.

 

I'd compare the currently available tier IV BBs to E-100 (Wyoming) and Jagdpanzer E-100 (Myogi).

Neither Wyoming nor Myogi have perfect armor, but it's just enough to stay at the frontline when used correctly.

The main difference being that the Myogi can begin an engagement and longer range, but in return suffers from a less suitable

gun layout.

 


 

On another note, isn't the Aurora literally a 1-1 copy of the St. Louis?

I mean... yeah... less hitpoints, but also 1km more firing range...

Meanwhile +-1 matchmaking compared to the St. Louis which (quite rightfully) still meets tier Vs...

Edited by Retia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,677 posts

So Kitakami is still under the rebalance anvil by the RUdevs that they are to limit her MM eh?

 

at least the Kawachis and SoCals wont get dragged into tier 6 matches where Fusos and New Mexicos blast them with impunity or carriers are all hellbent in sending them down under.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
509 posts

So Kitakami is still under the rebalance anvil by the RUdevs that they are to limit her MM eh?

 

at least the Kawachis and SoCals wont get dragged into tier 6 matches where Fusos and New Mexicos blast them with impunity or carriers are all hellbent in sending them down under.

 

Its been removed from the game last I heard never to be sold again as it was basically causing more team kills than enemy kills :teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SIF]
Senior Moderator
2,562 posts

So every ship from tier 5 onwards gets a 3 tier spread, and almost all of tier 4?

 

So how is Steeltrap and the the rest wrong? Under powered ships will still be clubbed by higher tiers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
509 posts

Yeah I think it just takes longer before you start getting seal clubbed.

 

Get players hooked first then the club comes!

Edited by Vyviel

Share this post


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

So every ship from tier 5 onwards gets a 3 tier spread, and almost all of tier 4?

 

Datasheet reading comprehension failure detected.

The columns, just in like WoT, are battle tiers not vehicle tiers.

 

So for example:

A tier IV Destroyer has a battle tier from 4-6

Now you look down to the highest tier vessels at battle tier 6 which,

as you will find out are tier VI.

 

I.e.: +-2 matchmaking just like in WoT, compared to the previous +-3 and maybe some more if matchmaker goes wobble wobble gob gob.

 


 

So all ships up until tier III get a +-1 tier matchmaking except for tier III cruisers, aka the St. Louis, because it's totally not doing way too well.

 

At tier IV all BBs and CVs keep the +-1 matchmaking, however DDs and cruisers go up to the new regular +-2.

 

At tier V CVs still keep the +-1 matchmaking while BBs now join the other two classes in the +-2 zone.

 

Above that all classes have +-2 tiers matchmaking aside form the tier IX and X vessels which obviously can't go higher.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
2,150 posts
486 battles

Data presentation 1.01: do not use the same term for different purposes.

If a ship has a tier, then a battle has a level.

Didn't any of these people have decent physics/chem teachers in year 11? Guess not, as they've been doing the same in WoT for 5 years, lol.

Battle level 5, for example, involves any ship with a coloured in cell on the chart. In other words that's tier 3 Cruisers then all ships of tiers 4 and 5.

 

I ranted about the tier 3 BBs recently. Good to see them get relief. They need it, badly, IMO. While Retia made some points from the old WoT experience in a rant perfectly reasonable thread of mine, they were largely peripheral to the broader reality (in other words I sort of agreed BUT the 10% of time they mattered didn't justify the 90% they didn't IMO, although we don't really need to argue that here).

 

Not so sure about the higher ones, however. Having said that, I think it's the mass HE spam of higher tier CAs that are more dangerous as they're accurate. Yes, a high tier BB might murder you, but there's plenty of RNG in that.

 

They're more or less acknowledging that RoF trumps potential alpha with CAs getting 3 tier opponent spreads before anyone else, aren't they?

 

So when does this happen? Good to see them changing things up fairly regularly (unlike the 2.5 YEARS it took them to do MM changes in WoT).

 

Edited by Steeltrap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LLBC]
Super Tester
750 posts
3,314 battles

On another note, isn't the Aurora literally a 1-1 copy of the St. Louis?

I mean... yeah... less hitpoints, but also 1km more firing range...

 

Kinda,

- lower HP (as you mentioned)

- lower RoF (7 vs. 8.2)

- none of the 76.2mm secondaries

 

So when does this happen?

 

Already done - it was the reason for the server maintenance this morning

 

Just looking over the new MM charts and I think the TL;DR is:

My Iwaki and ArkBeta just got turned into a pro-level seal clubber VwKlV2m.gif

Edited by Gunduck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
2,150 posts
486 battles

Already done? Great!

 

And, yes, I think the tier 3-4 BBs suddenly got a BIG rebalance. My Kawachi kept getting tier 6 battles, which was utterly ridiculous. Had forgotten about ArkB; that might work rather nicely.

 

CVs still suck, but WG is going to have a much harder time balancing that mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
225
[151ST]
Member
1,013 posts
4,521 battles

This is fantastic news!

Just wish the devs would post in Asia this sorts of stuffs...

Still I spose they can just let users spread the word for them :sceptic:

Share this post


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

Finally the MM is fix no more ranting or threads about MM is unfair phew...:honoring:

 

I still prefer +/-3 MM, a tier 4 damaging a tier higher tier than yours will give your more earnings in credits & exp. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,923 posts
4,018 battles

 

I still prefer +/-3 MM, a tier 4 damaging a tier higher tier than yours will give your more earnings in credits & exp. ;)

I won't mind that cause i am not the one having a tier 4 BB now but if you prefer a tier 4 damageing higher tier would others Commanders argree to it??? For me i won't mind i just shoot to kill only. BTW nice videos on your St Louis.:honoring:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
2,150 posts
486 battles

 

I still prefer +/-3 MM, a tier 4 damaging a tier higher tier than yours will give your more earnings in credits & exp. ;)

 

This is one of the most persistent myths of WoT (higher cr for higher tier targets was in WoT very briefly way back in beta). In fact you get more exp for damaging a target of a higher tier, but NOT any more CR.

 

You get the same CR for every point of damage you do regardless of its relative tier in WoT; anyone seen anything conclusive that says otherwise for WoWS?

 

If it's the same then the only way in which being bottom of a broad tier spread will potentially give you more CR is there will be more health floating around for you to damage. The obvious problem, however, is being able to do it as those higher tiers frequently can rub you out sooner than something of your own tier or lower.

 

The problem with the tier 3 BBs is they're slow, they're seen from BEYOND their own firing range, and that range is pathetically (and disastrously) lower than most opponents of higher tiers. Putting them in tier 6 battles was simply broken for the vast bulk of likely engagements IMO.

Edited by Steeltrap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
682 posts
4,757 battles

 

hmmmm .... maybe better with narrower spread ... but we already got problem finding a ship into the match in high tier so maybe it will not that good ... yet

to comment on low tier BB : well BB in low tier (tier3) is bad only when they not a top tier ... but if they are top tier playing vs tier2 cruiser then it can do a lot ... it like if you wanna win, try to stay away from BB and go for cap will be easier

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
392 posts

I'll remind you that the Arkansas Beta has no AA armament whatsoever, and besides carriers is also a favourite target for the likes of the Cheatland and Fuso, the latter of which is very capable of inflicting citadel hits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×