Jump to content


MM option.


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

Axelfoley666 #1 Posted 03 March 2018 - 04:40 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 21677 battles
  • 356
  • [TWD] TWD
  • Member since:
    04-17-2012

Has there ever been a discussion on an MM option same as battle type, where players can select assault mode, grand battles, but players could select same tier MM only. I suspect this may slow down time between battles for players, but it would be their choice.

 

Pro's, con's, viable or not. Discuss.



Spurtung #2 Posted 03 March 2018 - 04:41 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 60201 battles
  • 5,543
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013
:popcorn:

ThebaldEagle #3 Posted 03 March 2018 - 04:44 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 753 battles
  • 370
  • Member since:
    02-13-2014
:popcorn:

OreH75 #4 Posted 03 March 2018 - 04:53 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 46178 battles
  • 1,760
  • [3V] 3V
  • Member since:
    05-29-2013
Think what would be the only kind of MM people would select? 

Jigabachi #5 Posted 03 March 2018 - 04:57 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17753 battles
  • 17,692
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011

View PostAxelfoley666, on 03 March 2018 - 04:40 PM, said:

Has there ever been a discussion on an MM option same as battle type, where players can select assault mode, grand battles, but players could select same tier MM only.

I guess that was meant to be a question.

The answer is yes.

 

View PostAxelfoley666, on 03 March 2018 - 04:40 PM, said:

Pro's, con's, viable or not. Discuss.

Let's say we didn't have countless threads on that already, throwing a topic into the round and asking people to "discuss" is one of the most annoying things you can do on a forum. Especially if the topic is something trivial like this, where you will come to an obvious conclusion after wasting 10 seconds thinking about it.


Edited by Jigabachi, 03 March 2018 - 05:00 PM.


Axelfoley666 #6 Posted 03 March 2018 - 05:00 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 21677 battles
  • 356
  • [TWD] TWD
  • Member since:
    04-17-2012

View PostJigabachi, on 03 March 2018 - 03:57 PM, said:

I guess that was meant to be a question.

The answer is yes.

 

OK, thanks. And outcome of said discussion?

Axelfoley666 #7 Posted 03 March 2018 - 05:29 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 21677 battles
  • 356
  • [TWD] TWD
  • Member since:
    04-17-2012

View PostJigabachi, on 03 March 2018 - 03:57 PM, said:

Let's say we didn't have countless threads on that already, throwing a topic into the round and asking people to "discuss" is one of the most annoying things you can do on a forum. Especially if the topic is something trivial like this, where you will come to an obvious conclusion after wasting 10 seconds thinking about it.

 

In your opinion it's annoying, others will have a different opinion and may not have seen this question asked before same as me. Why is it trivial? If we have had as many threads on this subject as you say it can't be that trivial. Also with so many threads on the subject as you say, maybe the question has not been answered to other peoples satisfaction.



Balc0ra #8 Posted 03 March 2018 - 05:39 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 62894 battles
  • 14,473
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012
If there was one for GB "as it's tier X only". I would actually welcome it, and I know others would to. Even if it was a longer wait. For the other modes like like assault and encounter? Nah I see no point in it. I'm sure there are some that would love to play nothing but those two modes vs equal tiers. But I suspect that's to few for it to be worth it, as a majority have those modes off as is.

Axelfoley666 #9 Posted 03 March 2018 - 05:47 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 21677 battles
  • 356
  • [TWD] TWD
  • Member since:
    04-17-2012

View PostBalc0ra, on 03 March 2018 - 04:39 PM, said:

If there was one for GB "as it's tier X only". I would actually welcome it, and I know others would to. Even if it was a longer wait. For the other modes like like assault and encounter? Nah I see no point in it. I'm sure there are some that would love to play nothing but those two modes vs equal tiers. But I suspect that's to few for it to be worth it, as a majority have those modes off as is.

 

​I only mentioned assault and encounter as you have the option in settings to select to play or not to play. I would like the option, as I think, especially in the lower tiers it would be nice to grind through a tier 4 without hitting tier 6,s on a regular basis, for example. Alternately it is nice to also play against higher tiers as the exp and credit bonus for damaging and killing higher tiers is good.

Balc0ra #10 Posted 03 March 2018 - 05:58 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 62894 battles
  • 14,473
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostAxelfoley666, on 03 March 2018 - 05:47 PM, said:

 

​I only mentioned assault and encounter as you have the option in settings to select to play or not to play. I would like the option, as I think, especially in the lower tiers it would be nice to grind through a tier 4 without hitting tier 6,s on a regular basis, for example. Alternately it is nice to also play against higher tiers as the exp and credit bonus for damaging and killing higher tiers is good.

 

Ah well I read it wrong first then.

 

Same tier MM is fine, but constantly? Even if the wait was longer. It would wreck the normal MM on some tiers. Don't want to face +2. Buy a pref MM tank. Tier 4 has a chance to see equal tier games as much as the rest. I see no need to differentiate and alienate parts of the playerbase, because some use the "special" MM to never see +1 even. Gotta remember that some tanks are balanced for +2. Some for +2 in the current meta, others for an older meta. Then the only thing that would happen was that some played the T67 or the Matilda constantly to "pad". And tier 4 and 5 games would be full of them vs the tank spread we have know. I suspect I would be worse for a new player to grind with a bad crew and stock setup in his tier 4 with that mode where half the enemy team is in a 6 crew skill tank. Vs if they faced the odd tier 6 game with a more balanced "padding" setup. As that's what it would be reduced to I'm sure. A way to exploit MM and pad. Nothing more. 

 

 



Axelfoley666 #11 Posted 03 March 2018 - 06:00 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 21677 battles
  • 356
  • [TWD] TWD
  • Member since:
    04-17-2012

View PostBalc0ra, on 03 March 2018 - 04:58 PM, said:

 

Ah well I read it wrong first then.

 

Same tier MM is fine, but constantly? Even if the wait was longer. It would wreck the normal MM on some tiers. Don't want to face +2. Buy a pref MM tank. Tier 4 has a chance to see equal tier games as much as the rest. I see no need to differentiate and alienate parts of the playerbase, because some use the "special" MM to never see +1 even. Gotta remember that some tanks are balanced for +2. Some for +2 in the current meta, others for an older meta. Then the only thing that would happen was that some played the T67 or the Matilda constantly to "pad". And tier 4 and 5 games would be full of them vs the tank spread we have know. I suspect I would be worse for a new player to grind with a bad crew and stock setup in his tier 4 with that mode where half the enemy team is in a 6 crew skill tank. Vs if they faced the odd tier 6 game with a more balanced "padding" setup. As that's what it would be reduced to I'm sure. A way to exploit MM and pad. Nothing more. 

 

 

 

OK, thanks, good explanation.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users