Jump to content


Proposal for v2 of new MM


  • Please log in to reply
76 replies to this topic

Poll: did you play 0.4.1? If so, did you like it's MM better than the one now? (15 members have cast votes)

Did you play in 0.4.1 CBT?

  1. No (3 votes [20.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 20.00%

  2. Yes (12 votes [80.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 80.00%

Did you like 0.4.1 MM (balanced but quick) or the current one (ultra fast but it's a Yahtzee toss for balance)?

  1. 0.4.1 was better (9 votes [60.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 60.00%

  2. Current one is better. (6 votes [40.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 40.00%

If you haven't played before launch, do you believe this current MM is best since launch or was another? Comment below which you thought was best.

  1. Current MM is best post launch. (9 votes [60.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 60.00%

  2. Another POST-LAUNCH MM was better. I'll post it in comments. (6 votes [40.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 40.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote Hide poll

Traurig_Yoda #61 Posted 19 January 2015 - 08:38 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Open Beta Tester
  • 3 battles
  • 2,275
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    02-18-2013

View PostSkywhaleExpress, on 19 January 2015 - 03:29 PM, said:

 

have you even read anything I posted? We had a LOWER POPULATION in 0.4.1 and that MM pulled balanced and quick matches.

 

I read everything you wrote I am about 99.99% sure you are not able to prove anything regarding 0.4.1 or 1.4 or 1.2 or any other, unless you show some proof you are right I'm not interested in the guess work, too much of that has already horked this game up. So again, I say leave it a lone or get WG to post numbers. 

BlindSquirrell #62 Posted 19 January 2015 - 09:16 PM

    Airman Basic

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 5
  • Member since:
    11-18-2014

View PostSkywhaleExpress, on 18 January 2015 - 09:40 PM, said:

 

 

Here's my simplified proposal for making balanced* matches while still keeping the queue at less than 3 minutes.

 

1. We need to have the "so-called" sandbox. Where we went wrong with it, however, was that we made it for all the lower tiers of 1-5. Instead, it should be for the first tier and then start at occasionally to commonly seeing two tiers higher.

 

2. We need to balance flights and aircraft... Not by skill or battle count, but by themselves. two flights of 3, they go to separate teams. If one team has two IL's the other does... If the one team has three heavies, that too... Etc.

 

3. We need to make exceptions only for when a player has been in the queue for more than 3 minutes, they get the very next match.

 

4. Tiers that face each other should be as follows:

 

I vs I and II tops.

II can obviously see ones, but can also see III's and occasionally IV's.

III can see III and IV and occasionally see V's.

IV's see IVs and V's and occasionally VI's.

V's can see V's and VI's and sometimes VII's.

VI's can see VI and VII and occasionally no more than 3 tier VIII's. Must have 3 VIII on their team too.

VII can see VII and VIII and occasionally 3 IX's, as long as their team has 3 IX's.

VIII is unprotected. By this tier, it should regularly see up to tier 10, AS long as both teams have 10's.

 

Thoughts?

 

 

 

I Disagree.....

 

I think the Tiers should be kept together respective of their capabilities and Flight Era....

I & II    - (WWI Era) Pitching a II against a III or IV is grossly outmatched.

III & IV -

V & VI

Changes were made, I assume, because of "Seal Clubbing", or some such nonsense.... but all that's been done is to make it worse at every level.

Q: What's the difference between a Noobie T-I going up against an experienced T-II; and an Experienced T-II going against an experienced T-IV?

A: The Experienced T-II has no chance of winning against the T-IV no matter how good a pilot he is. The planes are mismatched to the point that the T-II CANNOT win. The T-IV can smoke the T-II before ever coming into range of the T-II's guns. On the other hand, the Noobie T-I CAN win against the experienced T-II. It's not a contest of mismatched aircraft, it's a contest of Flight Skill, which can be developed. Going up against better pilots teaches the inferior pilot things. Going up against superior aircraft teaches you nothing but "Stay out of the way". In other words, "Go Away".


 


 


 

 



GeorgePatton #63 Posted 19 January 2015 - 09:18 PM

    газета

  • -Community Ace-
  • 1609 battles
  • 5,452
  • [SCHLD] SCHLD
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

View PostBrushWolf, on 19 January 2015 - 02:18 PM, said:

How long did you wait for that one? I found that eventually the 1.6 MM would get desperate and throw completely mismatched planes and match counts together after enough time had passed which for me usually happened after at least 10 minutes of waiting.

 

I waited about 5.5 minutes for that match, and after that I continued to see players with 1k+ battles regularly.

 

View PostSkywhaleExpress, on 19 January 2015 - 03:29 PM, said:

have you even read anything I posted? We had a LOWER POPULATION in 0.4.1 and that MM pulled balanced and quick matches.

 

Yes, we had a lower population, but I think there's one thing you may be forgetting. Wasn't 0.4.1 when we'd all coordinate in the (universal) hangar chat to fly specific tiers to get full matches? I think that's a lot of why it worked. Now, we don't have high XP gains (it was doubled during beta) so not everybody has planes above tier 5-6. People are also interested in keeping 'good stats' and so they'll stay at tiers they feel comfortable pwning others. This contributes to why people are staying around tier 4-6. Most people can't handle the 'big boy toys'.

 

 

Cheers!
Glenn


                                                                                                                                 Click the Pictures to Visit My YouTube Channel.


SkywhaleExpress #64 Posted 19 January 2015 - 09:39 PM

    noob leader

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 4 battles
  • 10,731
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    09-09-2012

View PostTraurig_Yoda, on 19 January 2015 - 02:38 PM, said:

 

I read everything you wrote I am about 99.99% sure you are not able to prove anything regarding 0.4.1 or 1.4 or 1.2 or any other, unless you show some proof you are right I'm not interested in the guess work, too much of that has already horked this game up. So again, I say leave it a lone or get WG to post numbers. 

I actually agree with keeping it like it is for the time being... As long as we don't lose more players to "imbalanced matches".... Which I've only seen a few complaints on.... Because, well.... We had so long of such long wait times everyone just needs some time to have instant matches....

 

I am merely thinking two or more moves ahead, looking at the bigger picture in this chess game. And.... Therefore I don't want any rash decisions. I know this was a rash decision on gunlion's part... But it was a calculated such decision. People were sick of long waits. That's why I think at least a month or more of Uber quick matches just to get things going and people getting XP quicker, even on losses... Would do good. 

 

Again, moving forward, we need critical thinking that actually involves compromising our sense of "balance" with smoothness of matches being made... And addressing other failures like marketing. I honestly think a million bucks spent on advertising during prime time 18-49 age group popular tv networks would do some good as well.

 

Lastly, my proposed v.2 is an opinion, as I'm not able to access the hard data on my PC until I get it working again.... And it's an opinion that is based solely on the facts that balance is somewhat important, but that the type of balancing that whiners successfully got implemented did NOT work for NA.... But hurt.... And that the naysayers of a two tier spread MM actually got us to the point we were at that gunny was able to push for an NA only matchmaker....

All goes to show that placating people whom do not want to try to improve their own skills is not the way to go. 

 

So, I say keep this for as long as it takes to get a good feel.

 

Also, you know as well as I do that WG, like many other failing MMO devs, are far too scared to post any numbers that might shed light on the fact that their development ideas weren't as good as those intelligent ideas by critically analyzing players were. Pride stops positive directional movement lol.

View PostBlindSquirrell, on 19 January 2015 - 03:16 PM, said:

 

I Disagree.....

 

I think the Tiers should be kept together respective of their capabilities and Flight Era....

I & II    - (WWI Era) Pitching a II against a III or IV is grossly outmatched.

III & IV -

V & VI

Changes were made, I assume, because of "Seal Clubbing", or some such nonsense.... but all that's been done is to make it worse at every level.

Q: What's the difference between a Noobie T-I going up against an experienced T-II; and an Experienced T-II going against an experienced T-IV?

A: The Experienced T-II has no chance of winning against the T-IV no matter how good a pilot he is. The planes are mismatched to the point that the T-II CANNOT win. The T-IV can smoke the T-II before ever coming into range of the T-II's guns. On the other hand, the Noobie T-I CAN win against the experienced T-II. It's not a contest of mismatched aircraft, it's a contest of Flight Skill, which can be developed. Going up against better pilots teaches the inferior pilot things. Going up against superior aircraft teaches you nothing but "Stay out of the way". In other words, "Go Away".


 


 


 

 

You see.. What you're saying is the exact reason we got to the point of gunlion having to push such a drastic and sometimes imbalanced MM to the NA region. People conplaining about having to learn to deal with realistic situations is why we ended up with +10 minute queues.

 

The differences in aircraft performance separated by two tiers isn't neary as drastic as complainers think. The uet 4 plane outmaneuvers the tier 6 plane of the same line. But most whiners are of (this is my opinion) the "point and click" crowd, who don't ever learn to think of using their plane's superior maneuverability to their advantage.

View PostGeorgePatton, on 19 January 2015 - 03:18 PM, said:

 

I waited about 5.5 minutes for that match, and after that I continued to see players with 1k+ battles regularly.

 

 

Yes, we had a lower population, but I think there's one thing you may be forgetting. Wasn't 0.4.1 when we'd all coordinate in the (universal) hangar chat to fly specific tiers to get full matches? I think that's a lot of why it worked. Now, we don't have high XP gains (it was doubled during beta) so not everybody has planes above tier 5-6. People are also interested in keeping 'good stats' and so they'll stay at tiers they feel comfortable pwning others. This contributes to why people are staying around tier 4-6. Most people can't handle the 'big boy toys'.

 

 

Cheers!
Glenn

Actually, coordinated queuing in 0.4.1 was simply due to the fact that tiers 8-10 were not populated enough without said intervention. 

It had nothing to do with tiers lower than that.



Air Raid 8 Champions - BrushFyre

MIA - pappabear


Traurig_Yoda #65 Posted 19 January 2015 - 09:53 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Open Beta Tester
  • 3 battles
  • 2,275
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    02-18-2013

View PostSkywhaleExpress, on 19 January 2015 - 04:39 PM, said:

I actually agree with keeping it like it is for the time being... As long as we don't lose more players to "imbalanced matches".... Which I've only seen a few complaints on.... Because, well.... We had so long of such long wait times everyone just needs some time to have instant matches....

 

I am merely thinking two or more moves ahead, looking at the bigger picture in this chess game. And.... Therefore I don't want any rash decisions. I know this was a rash decision on gunlion's part... But it was a calculated such decision. People were sick of long waits. That's why I think at least a month or more of Uber quick matches just to get things going and people getting XP quicker, even on losses... Would do good. 

 

Again, moving forward, we need critical thinking that actually involves compromising our sense of "balance" with smoothness of matches being made... And addressing other failures like marketing. I honestly think a million bucks spent on advertising during prime time 18-49 age group popular tv networks would do some good as well.

 

Lastly, my proposed v.2 is an opinion, as I'm not able to access the hard data on my PC until I get it working again.... And it's an opinion that is based solely on the facts that balance is somewhat important, but that the type of balancing that whiners successfully got implemented did NOT work for NA.... But hurt.... And that the naysayers of a two tier spread MM actually got us to the point we were at that gunny was able to push for an NA only matchmaker....

All goes to show that placating people whom do not want to try to improve their own skills is not the way to go. 

 

So, I say keep this for as long as it takes to get a good feel.

 

Also, you know as well as I do that WG, like many other failing MMO devs, are far too scared to post any numbers that might shed light on the fact that their development ideas weren't as good as those intelligent ideas by critically analyzing players were. Pride stops positive directional movement lol.

You see.. What you're saying is the exact reason we got to the point of gunlion having to push such a drastic and sometimes imbalanced MM to the NA region. People conplaining about having to learn to deal with realistic situations is why we ended up with +10 minute queues.

 

The differences in aircraft performance separated by two tiers isn't neary as drastic as complainers think. The uet 4 plane outmaneuvers the tier 6 plane of the same line. But most whiners are of (this is my opinion) the "point and click" crowd, who don't ever learn to think of using their plane's superior maneuverability to their advantage.

Actually, coordinated queuing in 0.4.1 was simply due to the fact that tiers 8-10 were not populated enough without said intervention. 

It had nothing to do with tiers lower than that.

 

What George said is true, along with a ton of other issues following the soft wipe:

Hathore's thread:

http://forum.worldofwarplanes.com/index.php?/topic/13947-top-ten-list-of-frustrations-build-041/page__st__100#topmost

the poll and follow up:

http://http://forum.worldofwarplanes.com/index.php?/topic/13933-official-041-update-questionnaire/page__st__25#topmost

 

this video was made a week after .4.1 went in, not sure of the time it was recorded but 400 and less is pretty common off peek time right now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8yev6MQp8I

 

 

 


Edited by Traurig_Yoda, 19 January 2015 - 09:58 PM.


BlindSquirrell #66 Posted 19 January 2015 - 10:02 PM

    Airman Basic

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 5
  • Member since:
    11-18-2014

View PostSkywhaleExpress, on 19 January 2015 - 09:39 PM, said:

I actually agree with keeping it like it is for the time being... As long as we don't lose more players to "imbalanced matches".... Which I've only seen a few complaints on.... Because, well.... We had so long of such long wait times everyone just needs some time to have instant matches....

 

I am merely thinking two or more moves ahead, looking at the bigger picture in this chess game. And.... Therefore I don't want any rash decisions. I know this was a rash decision on gunlion's part... But it was a calculated such decision. People were sick of long waits. That's why I think at least a month or more of Uber quick matches just to get things going and people getting XP quicker, even on losses... Would do good.

 

Again, moving forward, we need critical thinking that actually involves compromising our sense of "balance" with smoothness of matches being made... And addressing other failures like marketing. I honestly think a million bucks spent on advertising during prime time 18-49 age group popular tv networks would do some good as well.

 

Lastly, my proposed v.2 is an opinion, as I'm not able to access the hard data on my PC until I get it working again.... And it's an opinion that is based solely on the facts that balance is somewhat important, but that the type of balancing that whiners successfully got implemented did NOT work for NA.... But hurt.... And that the naysayers of a two tier spread MM actually got us to the point we were at that gunny was able to push for an NA only matchmaker....

All goes to show that placating people whom do not want to try to improve their own skills is not the way to go.

 

So, I say keep this for as long as it takes to get a good feel.

 

Also, you know as well as I do that WG, like many other failing MMO devs, are far too scared to post any numbers that might shed light on the fact that their development ideas weren't as good as those intelligent ideas by critically analyzing players were. Pride stops positive directional movement lol.

You see.. What you're saying is the exact reason we got to the point of gunlion having to push such a drastic and sometimes imbalanced MM to the NA region. People conplaining about having to learn to deal with realistic situations is why we ended up with +10 minute queues.

 

The differences in aircraft performance separated by two tiers isn't neary as drastic as complainers think. The uet 4 plane outmaneuvers the tier 6 plane of the same line. But most whiners are of (this is my opinion) the "point and click" crowd, who don't ever learn to think of using their plane's superior maneuverability to their advantage.

Actually, coordinated queuing in 0.4.1 was simply due to the fact that tiers 8-10 were not populated enough without said intervention.

It had nothing to do with tiers lower than that.

 

Really?

 

So what you're saying is that the T-IV BF110 B - (HP301\FP209\AS435) is an equitable match to a T-II Bulldog (HP85\FP34\AS277) - simply because the Maneuverability of the Bulldog is 433 and BF110 is 222?

Before the Bulldog even knows the blip on the radar is a BF110 B, there is a spray of bullets coming. in less than 0.2 of a second, the bulldog is done. Exploding in just enough time to see the BF110 B text appear above the aircraft. (Forget about ever seeing the Red Targeting circle) The Range on the T-IV FAR EXCEEDS that of the T-II.


 

I'm not complaining about having to learn to deal with "realistic" situations. I LOVE a good dogfight. The Fact is: this T-II to T-IV matchup is HIGHLY unrealistic. To the point of Absurd.

So I'm a "complainer".... great.... if being upset because I get smoked "out-of-the-gate" by an aircraft whose Firepower\Range\and Speed are sufficiently outmatched to the point that they're getting free shots on me before I can even ID them, then yes... I'm a complainer. Totally unrealistic and stupid in it's matchup.


 

And thanks for the derogatory comment.


 


 



BrushWolf #67 Posted 19 January 2015 - 10:03 PM

    Major

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 80 battles
  • 5,907
  • [GWG] GWG
  • Member since:
    06-11-2012

 

 

View PostGeorgePatton, on 19 January 2015 - 03:18 PM, said:

 

I waited about 5.5 minutes for that match, and after that I continued to see players with 1k+ battles regularly.

 

 

Yes, we had a lower population, but I think there's one thing you may be forgetting. Wasn't 0.4.1 when we'd all coordinate in the (universal) hangar chat to fly specific tiers to get full matches? I think that's a lot of why it worked. Now, we don't have high XP gains (it was doubled during beta) so not everybody has planes above tier 5-6. People are also interested in keeping 'good stats' and so they'll stay at tiers they feel comfortable pwning others. This contributes to why people are staying around tier 4-6. Most people can't handle the 'big boy toys'.

 

 

Cheers!
Glenn

 

That was actually short but the standards of that MM. I don't think they ever properly flow charted that MM's functions as it acted differently for different people. It wasn't working the way it should have at all and still isn't on the EU and RU servers, it does too many strange things. With about 40 matches I waited five minutes for a match in my TSh-2 on the EU server during their prime time!


I used to have a handle on life until it broke off.

                             

 

“The church is near but the road is icy, the tavern is far away but I will walk carefully”

Russian Proverb

 


BrushWolf #68 Posted 19 January 2015 - 10:10 PM

    Major

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 80 battles
  • 5,907
  • [GWG] GWG
  • Member since:
    06-11-2012

View PostBlindSquirrell, on 19 January 2015 - 04:02 PM, said:

 

Really?

 

So what you're saying is that the T-IV BF110 B - (HP301\FP209\AS435) is an equitable match to a T-II Bulldog (HP85\FP34\AS277) - simply because the Maneuverability of the Bulldog is 433 and BF110 is 222?

Before the Bulldog even knows the blip on the radar is a BF110 B, there is a spray of bullets coming. in less than 0.2 of a second, the bulldog is done. Exploding in just enough time to see the BF110 B text appear above the aircraft. (Forget about ever seeing the Red Targeting circle) The Range on the T-IV FAR EXCEEDS that of the T-II.


 

I'm not complaining about having to learn to deal with "realistic" situations. I LOVE a good dogfight. The Fact is: this T-II to T-IV matchup is HIGHLY unrealistic. To the point of Absurd.

So I'm a "complainer".... great.... if being upset because I get smoked "out-of-the-gate" by an aircraft whose Firepower\Range\and Speed are sufficiently outmatched to the point that they're getting free shots on me before I can even ID them, then yes... I'm a complainer. Totally unrealistic and stupid in it's matchup.


 

And thanks for the derogatory comment.


 


 

 

With your W/R and K/D, I smell either a reroll or someone with lots of flight game experience, you should be able to take on a tier 4 in a tier 2. 

I used to have a handle on life until it broke off.

                             

 

“The church is near but the road is icy, the tavern is far away but I will walk carefully”

Russian Proverb

 


BlindSquirrell #69 Posted 19 January 2015 - 10:15 PM

    Airman Basic

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 5
  • Member since:
    11-18-2014

View PostBrushWolf, on 19 January 2015 - 10:10 PM, said:

 

With your W/R and K/D, I smell either a reroll or someone with lots of flight game experience, you should be able to take on a tier 4 in a tier 2.

 

I Disagree.

There comes a point when the planes are simply outmatched. And pitting a T-IV Heavy against a T-II Biplane is simply ridiculous.



SkywhaleExpress #70 Posted 19 January 2015 - 10:25 PM

    noob leader

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 4 battles
  • 10,731
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    09-09-2012

View PostBlindSquirrell, on 19 January 2015 - 04:15 PM, said:

 

I Disagree.

There comes a point when the planes are simply outmatched. And pitting a T-IV Heavy against a T-II Biplane is simply ridiculous.

 

If you read my OP, tier II would be a stepping stone tier where you uncommonly (but can, for sake of queue times) face tier 4's. And, I wasn't being derogatory... at least not intentionally.... Point and click does seem to be the norm of most players... And the people that complain about two tier spread are also typically the same ones whom are unwilling to learn to adapt to difficult situations. 

 

And, yes, it is quite reasonable to expect you to be situationally aware and learn to take advantage of your superior maneuverability. 

Your claim of not being able to see them is far-fetched... As of 1.4 (and it hasn't been reversed, only shortened from 20k+ ft. to 6-10k ft.) all aircraft are able to see all other aircraft at ranges more than triple the firing range of the biggest weapons (rockets) in the game. 

 

If you're incapable of paying attention, then that's a skill problem, not a matchup problem.



Air Raid 8 Champions - BrushFyre

MIA - pappabear


SkywhaleExpress #71 Posted 19 January 2015 - 10:26 PM

    noob leader

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 4 battles
  • 10,731
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    09-09-2012

View PostTraurig_Yoda, on 19 January 2015 - 03:53 PM, said:

 

What George said is true, along with a ton of other issues following the soft wipe:

Hathore's thread:

http://forum.worldofwarplanes.com/index.php?/topic/13947-top-ten-list-of-frustrations-build-041/page__st__100#topmost

the poll and follow up:

http://http://forum.worldofwarplanes.com/index.php?/topic/13933-official-041-update-questionnaire/page__st__25#topmost

 

this video was made a week after .4.1 went in, not sure of the time it was recorded but 400 and less is pretty common off peek time right now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8yev6MQp8I

 

 

 

You're saying off-peak. Our peak times see 750+ still.



Air Raid 8 Champions - BrushFyre

MIA - pappabear


BlindSquirrell #72 Posted 19 January 2015 - 10:43 PM

    Airman Basic

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 5
  • Member since:
    11-18-2014

View PostSkywhaleExpress, on 19 January 2015 - 10:25 PM, said:

 

If you read my OP, tier II would be a stepping stone tier where you uncommonly (but can, for sake of queue times) face tier 4's. And, I wasn't being derogatory... at least not intentionally.... Point and click does seem to be the norm of most players... And the people that complain about two tier spread are also typically the same ones whom are unwilling to learn to adapt to difficult situations.

 

And, yes, it is quite reasonable to expect you to be situationally aware and learn to take advantage of your superior maneuverability.

Your claim of not being able to see them is far-fetched... As of 1.4 (and it hasn't been reversed, only shortened from 20k+ ft. to 6-10k ft.) all aircraft are able to see all other aircraft at ranges more than triple the firing range of the biggest weapons (rockets) in the game.

 

If you're incapable of paying attention, then that's a skill problem, not a matchup problem.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree on being situationally aware. That's not an issue.

As for my claim of not being able to see them being far-fetched... yet, it continues to occur. Hence, my irritation.

I've made my points and said my peace, and apparently they're invalid.



Traurig_Yoda #73 Posted 19 January 2015 - 11:00 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Open Beta Tester
  • 3 battles
  • 2,275
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    02-18-2013

View PostSkywhaleExpress, on 19 January 2015 - 05:26 PM, said:

You're saying off-peak. Our peak times see 750+ still.

 

I do not know when he recorded that video as I stated, could have been on or off and we had over 900 day before yesterday for a short time.

SkywhaleExpress #74 Posted 20 January 2015 - 10:04 AM

    noob leader

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 4 battles
  • 10,731
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    09-09-2012

View PostTraurig_Yoda, on 19 January 2015 - 05:00 PM, said:

 

I do not know when he recorded that video as I stated, could have been on or off and we had over 900 day before yesterday for a short time.

 

Which would be enough of a reason for us to test the proposal on a test server, considering 909 is more than double 438. However, it seems the double digit IQers in charge of CT automatically and without regards to feedback and big reports... Will go ahead and implement anything being tested....

 

So in the bad crapshoot that the proposed MM makes things worse, it would be pushed to the live game across all regions.... It's a double edged sword. 

 



Air Raid 8 Champions - BrushFyre

MIA - pappabear


Traurig_Yoda #75 Posted 20 January 2015 - 05:20 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Open Beta Tester
  • 3 battles
  • 2,275
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    02-18-2013

View PostSkywhaleExpress, on 20 January 2015 - 05:04 AM, said:

 

Which would be enough of a reason for us to test the proposal on a test server, considering 909 is more than double 438. However, it seems the double digit IQers in charge of CT automatically and without regards to feedback and big reports... Will go ahead and implement anything being tested....

 

So in the bad crapshoot that the proposed MM makes things worse, it would be pushed to the live game across all regions.... It's a double edged sword. 

 

 

I am thinking that the CT will not have our MM as it is not our private test server but who knows it generally has low population too.

BrushWolf #76 Posted 20 January 2015 - 08:46 PM

    Major

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 80 battles
  • 5,907
  • [GWG] GWG
  • Member since:
    06-11-2012

View PostTraurig_Yoda, on 20 January 2015 - 11:20 AM, said:

 

I am thinking that the CT will not have our MM as it is not our private test server but who knows it generally has low population too.

 

The CT will have the standard MM and beyond the high ping will be painful to play on with guess what, 5 minute plus waits.

I used to have a handle on life until it broke off.

                             

 

“The church is near but the road is icy, the tavern is far away but I will walk carefully”

Russian Proverb

 


tanky_the_tank #77 Posted 20 January 2015 - 08:54 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 1,804
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostSkywhaleExpress, on 18 January 2015 - 09:40 PM, said:

 

1. We need to have the "so-called" sandbox. Where we went wrong with it, however, was that we made it for all the lower tiers of 1-5. Instead, it should be for the first tier and then start at occasionally to commonly seeing two tiers higher.

 

2. We need to balance flights and aircraft... Not by skill or battle count, but by themselves. two flights of 3, they go to separate teams. If one team has two IL's the other does... If the one team has three heavies, that too... Etc.

 

3. We need to make exceptions only for when a player has been in the queue for more than 3 minutes, they get the very next match.

 

4. Tiers that face each other should be as follows:

 

I vs I and II tops.

II can obviously see ones, but can also see III's and occasionally IV's.

III can see III and IV and occasionally see V's.

IV's see IVs and V's and occasionally VI's. 

V's can see V's and VI's and sometimes VII's. 

VI's can see VI and VII and occasionally no more than 3 tier VIII's. Must have 3 VIII on their team too.

VII can see VII and VIII and occasionally 3 IX's, as long as their team has 3 IX's.

VIII is unprotected. By this tier, it should regularly see up to tier 10, AS long as both teams have 10's.

 

Tier 1 mostly seeing tier 1 is good, works well in Tanks. But I don't think tier 1 difficulty matters a lot cause everyone can get past it in a few battles. Tier 3 and up is where the longer grind starts and frustration can set in.

 

Flights always seeing flights is enough to balance them. It's what MM should be doing. Problem is wait times without enough players. A flight of 3 when there's nothing else in queue is gonna hit 3 min a lot and trigger the complaint battles. They wait 3 min, other team loses a lot, same thing every time, nobody's really happy. I had some ideas for small teams I haven't put together yet, might help with the flight v solo battles.

 

Matching classes isn't strictly needed but some of their abilities need to match. If one side has GA the other needs SOMETHING that can kill ground without dying. Make sure the no GA side has rockets and bombs or w/e. If one side has high alt heavies give the other side someone who can climb as high so at least you can chase them when they dive. It's no fun when one side keeps diving and other can't line up before they're climbing again. Trying to match exact classes adds a lot of wait time and makes flights way harder to match.

 

Main problem with tiers is if you're chugging along 1km under everyone else without enough speed or guns to do anything. Other problem is you get a bunch of top tiers and you're the only weaker plane thrown in as fodder, if MM is going to put lower tiers in fight they should make up half team or more. After that it depends on how that tier compares to 2 above. If you can be part of fight, 2 tier gap isn't terrible. If you're only there as fodder, you need better MM. I don't know tier gaps well enough to comment on the list.


View Post Traurig_Yoda, on 14 March 2015 - 12:41 AM, said:

another ridiculous remark by TtT.

 





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users