Jump to content


Would 7-5-3 work ?


  • Please log in to reply
51 replies to this topic

Unangwata #1 Posted 21 January 2019 - 10:24 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 11004 battles
  • 455
  • [-NASA] -NASA
  • Member since:
    02-26-2017

Disadvantage: less low tier targets if you hit bottom. No games where you are king of the mountain as 1 of 3 top tier tanks.

 

Advantage: And you must really consider this- there is only slight chance that you will be bottom tier in WOT game. This means most of your games would be middle or top. Comparing it to the frequency of current bottom games that make you unhappy, this could turn the game around and make most of the population happy.

 



Xandania #2 Posted 21 January 2019 - 10:31 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 39474 battles
  • 1,231
  • [-DGN-] -DGN-
  • Member since:
    05-16-2013

not really I fear - it would just put those bottom tiers into the spot of being mainly irrelevant while the top tiers are plentiful enough to enounter each other early on in almost all cases - so no feeling of elation for being top tier either ^^

 

I'd still like a system where you'd be top/mid/bottom about equally in all applicable tiers - if there are too many tier 10s, maybe just make grand battles mandatory :P



Unangwata #3 Posted 21 January 2019 - 10:39 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 11004 battles
  • 455
  • [-NASA] -NASA
  • Member since:
    02-26-2017

View PostXandania, on 21 January 2019 - 10:31 AM, said:

not really I fear - it would just put those bottom tiers into the spot of being mainly irrelevant while the top tiers are plentiful enough to enounter each other early on in almost all cases - so no feeling of elation for being top tier either ^^

 

I'd still like a system where you'd be top/mid/bottom about equally in all applicable tiers - if there are too many tier 10s, maybe just make grand battles mandatory :P

 

Maybe not elevation true, but it roughly mean 50% of the enemy team is weaker than you and there is nothing stronger. And that would happen often. 

LordMuffin #4 Posted 21 January 2019 - 10:56 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 49165 battles
  • 11,729
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    06-21-2011

I would prefer it.
It would allow more top tier battles, which is nice imo.

It would also make my fewer buttom tiered battles better since it would allow me as a bottom tier to do my role of supporting the top tiers, instead of, as is know, lead a push and hope enemy top tiers are not there.

 

 

I also guess that such a matchmaking will make good players win more and bad players lose more compared to now. Which could be an issue.


Edited by LordMuffin, 21 January 2019 - 10:57 AM.


gpalsson #5 Posted 21 January 2019 - 11:01 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 23551 battles
  • 8,601
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    04-13-2013

Just fcing make it 8/7 and be done with it. Then make another template for when there are too many of one tier: 10/5, and another called 5/10. And another same tier template.

No need to make people suffer and meet tanks they can't do sh1t to, especially during stock grinds it is just stupid.

 

It really is that simple.


Edited by gpalsson, 21 January 2019 - 11:02 AM.


Unangwata #6 Posted 21 January 2019 - 11:02 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 11004 battles
  • 455
  • [-NASA] -NASA
  • Member since:
    02-26-2017

View PostLordMuffin, on 21 January 2019 - 10:56 AM, said:

I also guess that such a matchmaking will make good players win more and bad players lose more compared to now. Which could be an issue.

 

Maybe you are right. But consider in current system good/bad player can be in one of top 3 tanks which could have greater impact than when such role is alleviated by higher number of top tanks.



DeadLecter #7 Posted 21 January 2019 - 11:03 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 26683 battles
  • 1,025
  • Member since:
    05-28-2016
Problem with all these proposals is that any tank in this game is not designed to fight 2 tiers above. No tier 8 stands a chance against TX guns. And they don't have the gun to fight back. Tier 8s against tier 9s, can still damage them. But what can a T8 do against a V4, 430U or other OP TX tanks? WG has to remove the entire 2 tier MM and change it to +/-1. Even then it is not balanced and bottom tiers are at a disadvantage but at least they can fight back. In 3/5/7 an OP TX with a good driver can carry an entire flank. And that is not fair. 7/5/3 will just mess that up in a worse way.

Unangwata #8 Posted 21 January 2019 - 11:07 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 11004 battles
  • 455
  • [-NASA] -NASA
  • Member since:
    02-26-2017

View PostDeadLecter, on 21 January 2019 - 11:03 AM, said:

Problem with all these proposals is that any tank in this game is not designed to fight 2 tiers above. No tier 8 stands a chance against TX guns. And they don't have the gun to fight back. Tier 8s against tier 9s, can still damage them. But what can a T8 do against a V4, 430U or other OP TX tanks? WG has to remove the entire 2 tier MM and change it to +/-1. Even then it is not balanced and bottom tiers are at a disadvantage but at least they can fight back. In 3/5/7 an OP TX with a good driver can carry an entire flank. And that is not fair. 7/5/3 will just mess that up in a worse way.

 

 

How so ? There would be only 3 tanks of 2 tier difference. They could try playing support role. You wouldn't play such battles often and if so that would be some pace break to relax and do something seemingly impossible. In current system you have 7 tanks that have to do this.


Edited by Unangwata, 21 January 2019 - 11:09 AM.


Thornvalley #9 Posted 21 January 2019 - 11:15 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 37116 battles
  • 138
  • Member since:
    01-27-2015

Everything between 5-10 and 10-5 would be the best for this game (including single tier games). Just dump the 2 tier difference already. The only counter argument is the "lower variation" one, which is minor because the same number of battles will still be played for most tanks.

 

I recently made a new F2P account to see how the game is for new players. Everything is fine at lower tiers: Well balanced battles, not too many seal clubbers, quite easy to make credits (especially with the missions). However, when reaching t5 the current MM system comes into full swing, especially when you factor in that the tanks at hand are low on equipment (mainly VR), have bad crews and are not able to pen in stock configuration. I'm fairly sure that this puts many new players off from advancing further in WoT.


Edited by Thornvalley, 21 January 2019 - 11:17 AM.


Captain_Kremen0 #10 Posted 21 January 2019 - 11:17 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 37998 battles
  • 1,731
  • [TFMB] TFMB
  • Member since:
    06-04-2011
No top tier arty should be amongst any proposal.

Noo_Noo #11 Posted 21 January 2019 - 11:25 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 22195 battles
  • 2,514
  • Member since:
    05-05-2013
I know QB is in favour of 5-5-5 as it takes the pressure off being top tier. 
 

Cobra6 #12 Posted 21 January 2019 - 11:29 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16424 battles
  • 16,441
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

No, just make all matches 5-10 and be done with it.

 

Cobra 6



Unangwata #13 Posted 21 January 2019 - 11:30 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 11004 battles
  • 455
  • [-NASA] -NASA
  • Member since:
    02-26-2017
My point to add only 3 tanks of bottom tier is to make it happen least often to any player. This will improve overall morale. Removing -2 tier entirely would be too radical imo, 3 tanks is just enough to add some variety and unexpected.

OMG_Abaddon #14 Posted 21 January 2019 - 11:35 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 9734 battles
  • 533
  • [BDCP] BDCP
  • Member since:
    04-19-2011

You take into account that some tanks have trouble fighting their same tier, see for example stock TP25 with 50mm penetration which was already underwhelming in tier 4, fights against tier 7 potentially, and realize the current system doesn't work.

 

 

Maybe tanks should be measured in total power and assigned a matchmaking depending on their performance? M103 for example could be tier 5 and still lose easily with its 25mm armor rear, sides, and frontal turret armor. Now, I'm just jumping to conclusions there, the point is that +/-2 matchmaking is just there to force people to spam gold and drain their credits.

 



Unangwata #15 Posted 21 January 2019 - 11:38 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 11004 battles
  • 455
  • [-NASA] -NASA
  • Member since:
    02-26-2017

View PostOMG_Abaddon, on 21 January 2019 - 11:35 AM, said:

You take into account that some tanks have trouble fighting their same tier, see for example stock TP25 with 50mm penetration which was already underwhelming in tier 4, fights against tier 7 potentially, and realize the current system doesn't work.

 

I am aware of that tank, as I had horrible experience playing it stock. But I don't think MM should be affected by flaws in design of 1 tank or other.

OMG_Abaddon #16 Posted 21 January 2019 - 11:47 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 9734 battles
  • 533
  • [BDCP] BDCP
  • Member since:
    04-19-2011

View PostUnangwata, on 21 January 2019 - 11:38 AM, said:

I am aware of that tank, as I had horrible experience playing it stock. But I don't think MM should be affected by flaws in design of 1 tank or other.

 

Agreed. That's why I suggested fixing tanks first, and then deciding the matchmaking.

Gremlin182 #17 Posted 21 January 2019 - 12:15 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 51840 battles
  • 8,570
  • Member since:
    04-18-2012

roll back the MM to how it was before the stupid template system.

Sure it was sometimes unbalanced but not always and you did actually meet lower tier tanks.

+2 -2 where all your tanks appear at top middle and bottom tier equally is always going to be better than a system where you are always bottom or equal tiered.

 

Would you not like to be a tier 8 tank facing tier 6 7 and 8 tanks just as often as you meet tier 8 9 and 10.



LordMuffin #18 Posted 21 January 2019 - 12:21 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 49165 battles
  • 11,729
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    06-21-2011

View PostDeadLecter, on 21 January 2019 - 11:03 AM, said:

Problem with all these proposals is that any tank in this game is not designed to fight 2 tiers above. No tier 8 stands a chance against TX guns. And they don't have the gun to fight back. Tier 8s against tier 9s, can still damage them. But what can a T8 do against a V4, 430U or other OP TX tanks? WG has to remove the entire 2 tier MM and change it to +/-1. Even then it is not balanced and bottom tiers are at a disadvantage but at least they can fight back. In 3/5/7 an OP TX with a good driver can carry an entire flank. And that is not fair. 7/5/3 will just mess that up in a worse way.

 

In a 7-5-3 the impact of a single T10 tank is reduced.

It will be harder for the single T10 tank to carry an entire flank, since he will most likely meet like 2 other T10 tanks there or more, instead of, as currently is, like 1 T10 tank and some canon fodder (T8).



laulaur #19 Posted 21 January 2019 - 12:28 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 47279 battles
  • 1,625
  • [FUS2D] FUS2D
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

You can't balance tanks to perform well in a +2/-2 environment.

Let's take for example a premium tier 8 tank: you make it decent/good against tier 10 tanks, then it will be stupidly overpowered against anything below and including tier 8.

I think best solution is a +1/-1 MM with no specific teamplates but with mirrored tank classes (i am talking about that superheavy vs superheavy thing, that for some reason got removed and now i have seen lots of times 50B vs Type....).



TungstenHitman #20 Posted 21 January 2019 - 12:38 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25612 battles
  • 4,645
  • [POOLS] POOLS
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

Make it a 2 tier MM system and suddenly many game problem are solved. That's the answer and has been for years. The gap in performance is just too great across 3 tiers so a 2 tier MM is the most this game should ever be. Problem is fairly obvious. Even within an equal tier, tank classes are balanced so generally(I'm being VERY generalized here to class stereotypes) heavies have frontal or turret armor to that for most their parts, can block shots from equal tier mediums and lights but are prone to being penned by some equal tier heavies and TDs unless they angle their tanks and sidescrape etc. For meds and lights they can pen a lower plate or cupola of a same tier heavy but to do so is risky and if badly timed will usually result in taking more damage than the shot they deliver, so a more flanking and thoughtful gameplay is required but they get the speed to do this and all equal tier tanks have HP pools complementary to classes so in a same tier battle, things generally are balanced.

 

When we add a second tier to the battle, the balance is upset since suddenly heavy tank armor isn't good at frontally blocking +1 tier meds but still should work vs +1 tier lights frontally. Some tanks are a little powercreeped but generally +-1 is ok for most. However, when a tank has to face +2 tier, heavy tanks in particular have basically no armor and are slow hp pinatas and now even a light tank can pen it frontally so overall it just doesn't work.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users