Jump to content


The stronghold-poll, involving air/arty strikes and skill-based matchmaking


  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

Poll: Strongholds (280 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 250 battles in order to participate this poll.

Should air/arty strikes be removed from strongholds?

  1. Yes, but only from advances. (21 votes [7.50%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 7.50%

  2. Yes, but only from skirmishes (49 votes [17.50%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 17.50%

  3. Yes, from advances and skirmishes (109 votes [38.93%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 38.93%

  4. No (98 votes [35.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 35.00%

  5. Different opinion (please elaborate) (3 votes [1.07%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 1.07%

Should skill-based matchmaking be removed from skirmishes?

  1. Yes (144 votes [51.43%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 51.43%

  2. Yes, but give the weaker clan in a matchup a boost in credits/exp/boxes (91 votes [32.50%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 32.50%

  3. No (42 votes [15.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 15.00%

  4. Different opinion (please elaborate) (3 votes [1.07%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 1.07%

Vote Hide poll

FireflyDivision #1 Posted 27 March 2018 - 09:57 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 24303 battles
  • 3,925
  • [0XIDE] 0XIDE
  • Member since:
    04-18-2011

These topics are often discussed about on the forums, clan chats and streams. So what does the clan community of WoT EU generally think of it? Let's let WG know. 

 

The first question is about air/arty strikes. Some people say that air/arty strikes divert attention from actual tactics and strategies and also add a potential RNG-dependent win-button to the game. 

 

The 2nd question is about skill-based matchmaking in skirmishes. It often leads to even matchups in skirmishes. However, some people say that that isn't really needed. They believe that skirmishes aren't meant to be super-serious and they are rather a way to have fun, grind credits and practice and that therefore, it is more important to have quicker matching. 

 

To "compensate" the weaker clan in an uneven matchup, it is possible to give the weaker clan a bonus in exp/credits/boxes to make them happy to try.

 

 


Edited by FireflyDivision, 27 March 2018 - 10:01 AM.


James_Potkukelkka #2 Posted 27 March 2018 - 10:43 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 23736 battles
  • 64
  • [TSOP] TSOP
  • Member since:
    06-22-2013
+ Give back 15 vs. 15 X-tier skirmishes... 

Synop_s #3 Posted 27 March 2018 - 12:04 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 31754 battles
  • 4,085
  • [NOMI] NOMI
  • Member since:
    04-13-2014

Yep, 10v10 T10 SH is very balanced : 7 268v4 + 3 907 = easy win.

 

Bring back the old 15v15.



fryster_12 #4 Posted 27 March 2018 - 12:06 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 44261 battles
  • 861
  • [U-L] U-L
  • Member since:
    11-19-2012
I am not 100% sure the mm is skill bases in Strongholds, as more often than not you are put up against clans that are much higher in rating than your own, I don't think arty strike should be removed, as it can help dig out teams that camp, also don't think that Tier 10 Strongholds should go back to 15v15 as with 10v10 its makes it easier to get 2 teams going at once, if you want to play 15v15 tier 10 go play advances.

Serprotease #5 Posted 27 March 2018 - 12:10 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 37082 battles
  • 1,416
  • [N00T] N00T
  • Member since:
    12-05-2013

Remove skill MM in sh and give a shower of more or less meaningfull reward for just playing sh. Like, female crew, 30% of some tank and so on (like the christmas even)

This should drag new players to play sh.



fryster_12 #6 Posted 27 March 2018 - 12:11 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 44261 battles
  • 861
  • [U-L] U-L
  • Member since:
    11-19-2012

View PostSynop_s, on 27 March 2018 - 11:04 AM, said:

Yep, 10v10 T10 SH is very balanced : 7 268v4 + 3 907 = easy win.

 

Bring back the old 15v15.

 

Think that says more about the tank balance than it does the stronghold format being balanced.

FireflyDivision #7 Posted 27 March 2018 - 12:26 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 24303 battles
  • 3,925
  • [0XIDE] 0XIDE
  • Member since:
    04-18-2011

View Postfryster_12, on 27 March 2018 - 12:06 PM, said:

 I don't think arty strike should be removed, as it can help dig out teams that camp,

 

It also "digs out" your attack against a camp. How many times have you been striked when you grouped your tanks together to do a push? Or when you capped?

 

Camping is a matter that should be solved otherwise, by balancing the maps or excluding certain maps from sh. 


Edited by FireflyDivision, 27 March 2018 - 12:26 PM.


Synop_s #8 Posted 27 March 2018 - 12:27 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 31754 battles
  • 4,085
  • [NOMI] NOMI
  • Member since:
    04-13-2014

View Postfryster_12, on 27 March 2018 - 12:11 PM, said:

 

Think that says more about the tank balance than it does the stronghold format being balanced.

 

Yep but not only.

 

In 15v15, you can pick some fancy tanks because they will not penalize too much the rest of the team. In 10v10 its impossible. And you know, if we didn't met GO-IN, MVPS, 3V, etc. 2 battles out of 3 we should probably change to a funniest set up.

 

Btw, how can you train for CW if you can't train your 15v15 ? You just have 2 advances by night (3 during weekend), it's very low.


Edited by Synop_s, 27 March 2018 - 12:31 PM.


BlablaPaige #9 Posted 27 March 2018 - 12:33 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Clan Commander
  • 20805 battles
  • 7,488
  • [N00T] N00T
  • Member since:
    03-16-2011

View Postfryster_12, on 27 March 2018 - 12:06 PM, said:

I am not 100% sure the mm is skill bases in Strongholds

 

It is, its not a rumor or a fake news, that mm really exist

Domstadtkerl #10 Posted 27 March 2018 - 12:37 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 23320 battles
  • 1,222
  • [SHEKL] SHEKL
  • Member since:
    07-29-2014

I think skilled MM is a good idea for whatever teambased Gamemode there is, as long as there are rising rewards for higher ELO-Fights. Why should a draw/win/loss vs the strongest Clan on the server give the same rewards as a draw vs the weakest clan on the server?

 

Ye, skirmishes are kind of tricky. WG introduced them wrongly and now everybody is mad at them for making the gamemode competitive.



fryster_12 #11 Posted 27 March 2018 - 01:44 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 44261 battles
  • 861
  • [U-L] U-L
  • Member since:
    11-19-2012

I agree with most of what has been said above, however they would be better off having 2 tier 10 games modes one for 15v15 the other for 10v10 then everyone can have the option and variety to do whatever one they like, they may even expand to do the option to 15v15 tier 8 as that would be quite interesting, however like a lot of things with WG I doubt they will listen.

 

Arty strike is too powerful as it can wipe out an entire tank from full hp, or severely damage multiple vehicles at once, so a reduction in damage may help.


Edited by fryster_12, 27 March 2018 - 01:45 PM.


mango91 #12 Posted 27 March 2018 - 01:51 PM

    Captain

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 42525 battles
  • 2,006
  • [ORKI] ORKI
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011

View Postfryster_12, on 27 March 2018 - 01:44 PM, said:

I agree with most of what has been said above, however they would be better off having 2 tier 10 games modes one for 15v15 the other for 10v10 then everyone can have the option and variety to do whatever one they like, they may even expand to do the option to 15v15 tier 8 as that would be quite interesting, however like a lot of things with WG I doubt they will listen.

 

Arty strike is too powerful as it can wipe out an entire tank from full hp, or severely damage multiple vehicles at once, so a reduction in damage may help.

 

SH player base is already small, having 2 options for both tierX and VIII would split it even more

fryster_12 #13 Posted 27 March 2018 - 01:57 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 44261 battles
  • 861
  • [U-L] U-L
  • Member since:
    11-19-2012

View Postmango91, on 27 March 2018 - 12:51 PM, said:

 

SH player base is already small, having 2 options for both tierX and VIII would split it even more

 

Well the player base comes from Clans and there are plenty of them about and plenty of them have the numbers on paper to do them, so why are they not doing them, its either because they don't want to or, they don't actually have the numbers to do them and if you can't get 10 players then thats a worry.

Edited by fryster_12, 27 March 2018 - 01:59 PM.


mango91 #14 Posted 27 March 2018 - 02:08 PM

    Captain

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 42525 battles
  • 2,006
  • [ORKI] ORKI
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011

this worry is exactly the reason why this topic has been opened, I guess.

 

Making SH system easier, funnier, more rewarding for "little clans" should attract more people.

The 10vs10 has been implemented with the hope to have more teams playing and waiting in the queue (not arguing on its effectiveness now, WG made its choice)



FireflyDivision #15 Posted 27 March 2018 - 02:08 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 24303 battles
  • 3,925
  • [0XIDE] 0XIDE
  • Member since:
    04-18-2011

View Postfryster_12, on 27 March 2018 - 01:57 PM, said:

 

Well the player base comes from Clans and there are plenty of them about and plenty of them have the numbers on paper to do them, so why are they not doing them, its either because they don't want to or, they don't actually have the numbers to do them and if you can't get 10 players then thats a worry.

 

With skilled mm involved, it sometimes already takes pretty long to find a match in the current state.

 

You voted to keep skilled mm. How exactly are you planning on ever getting a match if you keep skilled mm and also fragment the playerbase at the same time by introducing two versions of t8 and t10 skirmishes?



fryster_12 #16 Posted 27 March 2018 - 03:00 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 44261 battles
  • 861
  • [U-L] U-L
  • Member since:
    11-19-2012

View PostFireflyDivision, on 27 March 2018 - 01:08 PM, said:

 

With skilled mm involved, it sometimes already takes pretty long to find a match in the current state.

 

You voted to keep skilled mm. How exactly are you planning on ever getting a match if you keep skilled mm and also fragment the playerbase at the same time by introducing two versions of t8 and t10 skirmishes?

 

Well they can do two versions of 10v10 strongholds, they don't have to do the suggestion with tier 8, however this was not what your original concern was, giving more options will open more doors for people to play, you just have to make sure that you are giving people the right options, not having enough teams at 10v10 tier 10 was more of an issue when the global map was open, now its not open there seems to be more teams playing in the evening.

StinkyStonky #17 Posted 27 March 2018 - 03:49 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 29494 battles
  • 2,247
  • [-SJA-] -SJA-
  • Member since:
    11-02-2015

Arty/Airstrikes - don't really bother me.  Both sides have them, they're not a secret or a surprise and there is skill and judgement as to when and where to drop them.  They do provide a greater advantage to better (higher tier SH) clans and so that could be an argument for removing them.  Has WG ever given a rationale for why they added them ?

 

Skill Based MM - It's absolutely essential.  The biggest problem is that it still isn't skill based enough.  It is still a very exploitative mode with top clans able to farm lower clans.  The moaning by the top clans is that in the past they could take any old tank they were grinding, have no FC, p!ss about with any old tactic and because their team skill level vastly exceeded the majority of their opponents, they got win after win after win, made loads of credits and had a whale of a time.  Of course this meant that for lesser clans they could only ever take top performance tanks, their best FC and use the same, tried and tested tactics and still get loss after loss after loss ... and then abandon the mode. 
Now with skill based MM the top clans still achieve a much higher win rate than their players do in randoms, but it has dropped a little because occasionally they come up against a competitive clan and have to "tryhardering" or lose.

Lesser clans still lose a lot of games but have a higher proportion of competitive games where they have a reasonable chance of winning.

 

15v15 Tier 10s - if only there was a mode that offered this.  It's such a shame that advances has been removed from the game ... oh yeah, it hasn't.

When WG trialled 10v10 tier 10s the number of games went up by over 500%.  I had never played Tier 10 SHs prior to this change.  Now we have squabbles about whether to play T8 or T10.  We now do both.  T8 for credits and T10 for boxes.

It's a MASSIVE improvement.

We do still struggle to get 15 for advances.

 

I do have a suggestion for improving Advances.  Last night (after we couldn't get anywhere near enough players) I tried to legionnaire.  As the clock hit the hour I noticed at least a dozen teams that failed to make the deadline because they only had 13 or 14 players.

It would be nice if legionnaires could offer themselves for "Any Team" and clans could enable slots for "Any Player", then on the hour the MM could allocate players to teams (either based on PR/ELO or randomly).  It would allow more players and more teams to play the mode.  That has to be a good thing.  Missing that deadline is incredibly frustrating.



Synop_s #18 Posted 27 March 2018 - 04:55 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 31754 battles
  • 4,085
  • [NOMI] NOMI
  • Member since:
    04-13-2014

View PostStinkyStonky, on 27 March 2018 - 03:49 PM, said:

Now with skill based MM the top clans still achieve a much higher win rate than their players do in randoms, but it has dropped a little because occasionally they come up against a competitive clan and have to "tryhardering" or lose.

 

Lol.

_Crusad3r_ #19 Posted 27 March 2018 - 05:25 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 29936 battles
  • 1,599
  • [MEME] MEME
  • Member since:
    11-22-2012

View PostStinkyStonky, on 27 March 2018 - 02:49 PM, said:

Arty/Airstrikes - don't really bother me.  Both sides have them, they're not a secret or a surprise and there is skill and judgement as to when and where to drop them.  They do provide a greater advantage to better (higher tier SH) clans and so that could be an argument for removing them.  Has WG ever given a rationale for why they added them ?  Life was fine before arty strikes as they were only used in the old SH and should only have ported over to Advances but no idea why they took away what was essentially a more enjoyable and less tryhard side to clans....

 

Skill Based MM - It's absolutely essential.  The biggest problem is that it still isn't skill based enough.  It is still a very exploitative mode with top clans able to farm lower clans.  The moaning by the top clans is that in the past they could take any old tank they were grinding, have no FC, p!ss about with any old tactic and because their team skill level vastly exceeded the majority of their opponents, they got win after win after win, made loads of credits and had a whale of a time.  Of course this meant that for lesser clans they could only ever take top performance tanks, their best FC and use the same, tried and tested tactics and still get loss after loss after loss ... and then abandon the mode. 
Now with skill based MM the top clans still achieve a much higher win rate than their players do in randoms, but it has dropped a little because occasionally they come up against a competitive clan and have to "tryhardering" or lose.

Lesser clans still lose a lot of games but have a higher proportion of competitive games where they have a reasonable chance of winning. My counter argument is still that these players are better and how will you ever improve if you keep fighting the same skilled players and still only achieving 40% w/r or lower when FAME is perfectly capable of winning 60%+, GO-IN is winning a similar number even though these clans always fight each other due to the skill based MM. If you can't see my point by this point I am trying to say that maybe its not the clans you're fighting - maybe its your own clan. Whether you don't have skilled FC's (I am sure someone out there will be willing to share tactics...) or the players aren't playing to a level they should be playing at. If you can't get a better w/r after skill based MM was introduced I don't see why you use it as a way to try and bash everyone who is against it when you haven't exactly benefited from it either.

 

15v15 Tier 10s - if only there was a mode that offered this.  It's such a shame that advances has been removed from the game ... oh yeah, it hasn't. Yes and advances require an hour and are at a certain time each night and on the hour which is hardly a viable training ground for tactics.

When WG trialled 10v10 tier 10s the number of games went up by over 500%.  I had never played Tier 10 SHs prior to this change.  Now we have squabbles about whether to play T8 or T10.  We now do both.  T8 for credits and T10 for boxes. Yes the numbers went up because clans who couldn't get 15 players (play T8 then if you don't have the activity) managed to play - doesn't make it a good change. Now for CW all you have to train for it is advances and you say below you can't even get 15 players. So good luck getting anywhere on the GM and getting reward tanks, decent gold income, camo's etc...I.e get a more active clan running....

It's a MASSIVE improvement.

We do still struggle to get 15 for advances. Keep copy pasta on recruitment then ;)

 

I do have a suggestion for improving Advances.  Last night (after we couldn't get anywhere near enough players) I tried to legionnaire.  As the clock hit the hour I noticed at least a dozen teams that failed to make the deadline because they only had 13 or 14 players. Maybe focus on getting 15 players each night minimum instead of getting legionnaires in. 8/10 legionnaires leave after 1 battle or when they die and end up screwing you over further into the advance.

It would be nice if legionnaires could offer themselves for "Any Team" and clans could enable slots for "Any Player", then on the hour the MM could allocate players to teams (either based on PR/ELO or randomly).  It would allow more players and more teams to play the mode.  That has to be a good thing.  Missing that deadline is incredibly frustrating. Oh yeah that's a great idea - oh wait. He/she won't be on ts. They might not have the tank you want. They might just do whatever they want and screw you over. 

 



Serprotease #20 Posted 27 March 2018 - 09:10 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 37082 battles
  • 1,416
  • [N00T] N00T
  • Member since:
    12-05-2013

View PostStinkyStonky, on 27 March 2018 - 02:49 PM, said:

 

Skill Based MM - It's absolutely essential.  The biggest problem is that it still isn't skill based enough.  It is still a very exploitative mode with top clans able to farm lower clans.  

 

 

 

Block Quote

"Description
We are part of the Havoc X community formed by Sir Havoc with the aim of bringing a friendly environment and learning to those players who wish to improve their gameplay."

 

So improving means asking to lower the level until it's low enough for you to look good ?






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users