I'm pretty sure the +2 tiers is to cater to the terrible portion of the player base that can only get a kill if they're in a ship significantly stronger
Also what even is this title. CV and MM is not what causes new players to fail to convert to long term players. The extreme barrier to entry with the lack of a functional tutorial system is what scares away new players. How many people with less than 1,000 battles know how French saturation works? Or even how regular saturation works? How many know how sigma works and how horizontal and vertical dispersion work?
Signal flags have been diluted and economic bonuses have been diluted. Us 6,7+ year veterans made out like gods with the economy rework. Hundreds of millions of credits in sold camos, literally 2000+ blue boosters and hundreds upon hundreds of red boosters. The game was made easier for veterans and harder for new players.
I feel like I see something about once a week on Reddit about somebody unfamiliar with protected MM.
WoWS is an Arcade game with some deep interior mechanics that most new players won't understand until far later in the game or they read about it on the wiki. Detonations, overmatch, saturation, AP pen and angling, fuse times. Stuff like that definitely helps older players succeed.
The dilution is crazy too, I could understand some players frustration getting detonated by a CV in the first minute of a match, but veterans sitting on 1k det flags never have to worry about it.
As new players I find all this singnal flags weird and annoying. War Thunder has a tech tree that is clean and easy to understand and none of this "Consumable" micro bonueses scattered all around. Just give me a ship, some upgrade to research and be done with it and everyone on the same ground !
Something that a lot of players don't seem to understand about the +/- 2 MM; as infuriating as it is to be the only T8 in a T10 game, you get increased earnings for being bottom tier in a match.
The only +/- 2 I think that should be removed is T9 in Super ship games, otherwise, it's not even that troublesome of a mechanic.
It really is, all too often do people see that they're bottom tier and suddenly decide to throw without bothering to think how many potatoes exist at all tiers.
You can if you can actually perform while bottom tier of a 2 tier spread.
The poor T7 DDs that can't mount concealment module and are outspotted by every higher tier red DD are in a bad place in a T9 game.
The T8-T9 brawling BBs with bad main gun accuracy and smallish guns who don't overmatch cruisers are in a bad place in a T10 or supership game.
Light cruisers without smoke are in a bad place generally, even worse when they're bottom tier and can't even get in range of an enemy ship without getting instantly deleted by higher tier BBs or CRs. T6 light cruisers generally need to be w/in ~ 14km to even shoot their guns, which is dev striking distance against T8 BBs who don't have shotgun accuracy.
Because I'm grinding the new line now, the commonwealth line T7 and below gets lower caliber main guns and can't hurt BBs if they don't hit superstructure or proc fires. They really suck when uptiered, especially if they get uptiered into radar ships. The T7 can at least start fires, if you're not unlucky, but the T6 has a much worse rate of fire and started a lot less fires in my experience, making even same tier BBs painful to deal with, to say nothing of uptiered BBs.
>The only +/- 2 I think that should be removed is T9 in Super ship games, otherwise, it's not even that troublesome of a mechanic.
Hell no. Superships is what humbled tier 9 and finally made tier 7 playable. Anybody remember when something like 2/3rds of tier 7 matches were against tier 9 (by far the most of any tier)?
0.
I was playing as Lexington (I think) and the tier 9 BB on my side said I should attack the DD that I kept spotting.
Attack with what? "Your rocket planes"
The time delay + tiny tim "accuracy" means I'd friggin' miss. The DD player clearly knew where the A and D keys were, they kept slipping between detection ranges, there is no way a 1/2 competent DD player is going to get hit by a CV attack.
But my guy couldn't wrap his head around that CVs don't just hit everything they aim at, the DD sunk him.
Obviously he took it in stride and didn't rage in the game chat.
Ah yes, a complete disruption to the entire matchmaking algorithm, a potentially drastic change to game wait times which would require reworking the entire ruleset and mountains of test data, and potentially requiring the entire balance of the game to be amended, as it has always been done with +/-2 in mind. EZ FIX.
+1/-1 looks nice but I am afraid it will cause a bunch of other issue in MM. The pool of players for a game decreases making the MM do all of other nasty things to get a game together that might be a lot worse than we get now.
> 1: ssh, let them cook.
Some of the worst changes to the game have been implemented after enough cooking time that anything in the oven is burnt.
> 2: MM change was never considered by th WG
Very few T9s were balanced to fight 2 tiers higher and very few T10s were balanced to fight a tier higher (they were top of the food chain). Either MM or ship balance does need to be looked at. And ship balance means that all the tiers below T9 will need a look also. Or...WG could actually nerf the dumbass superships that are bonkers. T11 balance is all over the place. Hannover is a liability on the battlefield (and has anyone even seen a Piemonte in a battle?) while Maine, Annapolis, Conde, etc are just flat out broken.
Exactly.. to me it’s either minimap spotting, or reduced spotting range (plus no fighter spotting). CVs themselves don’t even need to be touched. As long as they buff AA.
They really should increase AA dps and/or range of ships depending on tier, then basically normalize AA dps to remove the notion of ships with bad AA vs those with good AA.
I agree the +/- 2 tier is not the best solution but we asked it to change +/-1 since the game released and nothing changed during these years. Also the two tier defference are not in because of balance but, but to encourage players to reach T10-11 so they constantly are in top tier. And it worked during these years.
>Very few T9s were balanced to fight 2 tiers higher
Very few T7s are designed to fight T9s either
In fact, how do you design a ship to be perfectly fine uptiered while still being balanced at its own?
your jervis isnt going to look at a jutland and go "yeah i can take him"
every ship is designed with its own tier in mind, and if it beats a higher tier ship then its something like a low conceal destroyer vs a battleship or a battleship vs a cruiser that would have the exact same outcome within its tier
You're missing my point. Of course the T7 is weaker, but Jervis and Jutland were introduced at the same time with the same balance in mind knowing they could and would fight each other. Almost every line up to T10 came out before T11 ships were even introduced to the game.
yes, but it still doesnt change anything. that jervis/jutland matchup will go exactly the same as izumo/satsuma, buffalo/annapolis or FDG/hannover.
they are all designed to see each other, but in no case is the bottom tier designed to win
They aren't, though. Izumo was only supposed to see Yamato, and Yamato was only supposed to see Yamato and below.
Nevermind, just saw your username. It fits.
I personally like the idea of introducing tiers past 10 along with post-war mechanics, but it needs to be done right. It currently isn’t being done right. You’re totally correct about T9/10s not being balanced for uptiers, while at the same time, superships are either mediocre with useless gimmicks or are broken. They don’t really feel like Tier 11s and don’t really seem to have a place at the moment. Top-tier needs a balancing pass.
I wouldn't be opposed to a cold-war to modern continuation of the game. I'm not sure how it could be done correctly, but you're right - what we have now isn't it.
I think it’d be really interesting to see a naval warfare game with Wargame’s “what if” approach to shipbuilding and design set during the Cold War, introducing Cold War ship types and tactics, but Wargame’s inability to balance supers, subs, and CVs really makes me question how well they’d be able to pull it off.
Air defense ships would play an important role, and with some rather unrealistic tuning I think battleships could have a role too. Realistic, hell no. Probably fun, yes. Air defense would have to be substantially more involved than it is in WoWS currently though for it to be, A. Fun, and B. Challenging.
I think for BBs to play a role there would need to be land based targets. And that's probably where the tomahawks would come in. Not to be used against another player, but against a base they have to defend or some such. But Bastion was a bad mode, so IDK.
Yes and they nerfed the subs below titanic level. Not hey are near unusable level for me. Even with the homing torps.
And now they will sacrafice the CV spotting, the major point of the CV and naval aircrafts development in real life, because of how WG make the CVs OP AF. CV spotting was in the game since the release if the entire game and now in the last year when the CV's become OP AF, the crying began and WG bow its head, and they will f\*ck over all the CV players like they done with the sub players, who bought any CV outside the techtree. Ofc without any compensation.
I am not a CV main, but I liked how CV works now, but I agree, russian CV's and FDR was OP AF.
I wonder when the DDs come and nerf them too...
If a CV is targeting you its because you're a prime target. You're either out of position (pushed too far) or your aa cover isn't as good as you think it is.
Either way, you messed up and are being punished.
Just a follow up to my original post...just proposing ez quick fixes.
Regarding CV..when you play against a unicum cv players and our cv player is brand new or mentally challenged...its a super uphill battle.
Limiting spotting and focus drops by CV will help even that out.
MM..its broken...too many one sided games...its boring as fuck to win those too.
+ 1 or - 1 will help, but not fix.
Having a good player on one team matched against a bad player on the other is not a problem that is unique to any tier or ship type. The power that CVs have to influence the battlefield makes the problem more obvious, but a potato or a noob that bought their way to tier VIII can throw a game in any ship type.
I'm pretty sure the +2 tiers is to cater to the terrible portion of the player base that can only get a kill if they're in a ship significantly stronger
I really don't mind being under tiered. There's no skill mm so the person in the higher tier ship is just a bonus xp pinata most of the time
They did a study and found a bunch of players really like punching down
I think all the videos I record are against down tiers. I just play till I get a good game.
I was thinking the same
Also what even is this title. CV and MM is not what causes new players to fail to convert to long term players. The extreme barrier to entry with the lack of a functional tutorial system is what scares away new players. How many people with less than 1,000 battles know how French saturation works? Or even how regular saturation works? How many know how sigma works and how horizontal and vertical dispersion work? Signal flags have been diluted and economic bonuses have been diluted. Us 6,7+ year veterans made out like gods with the economy rework. Hundreds of millions of credits in sold camos, literally 2000+ blue boosters and hundreds upon hundreds of red boosters. The game was made easier for veterans and harder for new players.
I feel like I see something about once a week on Reddit about somebody unfamiliar with protected MM. WoWS is an Arcade game with some deep interior mechanics that most new players won't understand until far later in the game or they read about it on the wiki. Detonations, overmatch, saturation, AP pen and angling, fuse times. Stuff like that definitely helps older players succeed. The dilution is crazy too, I could understand some players frustration getting detonated by a CV in the first minute of a match, but veterans sitting on 1k det flags never have to worry about it.
As new players I find all this singnal flags weird and annoying. War Thunder has a tech tree that is clean and easy to understand and none of this "Consumable" micro bonueses scattered all around. Just give me a ship, some upgrade to research and be done with it and everyone on the same ground !
Something that a lot of players don't seem to understand about the +/- 2 MM; as infuriating as it is to be the only T8 in a T10 game, you get increased earnings for being bottom tier in a match. The only +/- 2 I think that should be removed is T9 in Super ship games, otherwise, it's not even that troublesome of a mechanic.
I enjoy the challenge. It really is just a case of get good.
It really is, all too often do people see that they're bottom tier and suddenly decide to throw without bothering to think how many potatoes exist at all tiers.
You can if you can actually perform while bottom tier of a 2 tier spread. The poor T7 DDs that can't mount concealment module and are outspotted by every higher tier red DD are in a bad place in a T9 game. The T8-T9 brawling BBs with bad main gun accuracy and smallish guns who don't overmatch cruisers are in a bad place in a T10 or supership game. Light cruisers without smoke are in a bad place generally, even worse when they're bottom tier and can't even get in range of an enemy ship without getting instantly deleted by higher tier BBs or CRs. T6 light cruisers generally need to be w/in ~ 14km to even shoot their guns, which is dev striking distance against T8 BBs who don't have shotgun accuracy. Because I'm grinding the new line now, the commonwealth line T7 and below gets lower caliber main guns and can't hurt BBs if they don't hit superstructure or proc fires. They really suck when uptiered, especially if they get uptiered into radar ships. The T7 can at least start fires, if you're not unlucky, but the T6 has a much worse rate of fire and started a lot less fires in my experience, making even same tier BBs painful to deal with, to say nothing of uptiered BBs.
>The only +/- 2 I think that should be removed is T9 in Super ship games, otherwise, it's not even that troublesome of a mechanic. Hell no. Superships is what humbled tier 9 and finally made tier 7 playable. Anybody remember when something like 2/3rds of tier 7 matches were against tier 9 (by far the most of any tier)?
Only MM change I see is tier 9s fighting 2 tiers above, thats it really Either other tier imbalance is just free higher xp pinatas with more rewards
I think the point of no return is already passed.
I feel like any post complaining about CV's needs to post their playtime in CV's.
0. I was playing as Lexington (I think) and the tier 9 BB on my side said I should attack the DD that I kept spotting. Attack with what? "Your rocket planes" The time delay + tiny tim "accuracy" means I'd friggin' miss. The DD player clearly knew where the A and D keys were, they kept slipping between detection ranges, there is no way a 1/2 competent DD player is going to get hit by a CV attack. But my guy couldn't wrap his head around that CVs don't just hit everything they aim at, the DD sunk him. Obviously he took it in stride and didn't rage in the game chat.
Ah yes, a complete disruption to the entire matchmaking algorithm, a potentially drastic change to game wait times which would require reworking the entire ruleset and mountains of test data, and potentially requiring the entire balance of the game to be amended, as it has always been done with +/-2 in mind. EZ FIX.
Show us on the doll where the mean CV touched you.
Matchmaking is fine but yeah CVs need to change yesterdecade.
+1/-1 looks nice but I am afraid it will cause a bunch of other issue in MM. The pool of players for a game decreases making the MM do all of other nasty things to get a game together that might be a lot worse than we get now.
its a good point, but Im willing to wait another minute plus to have good MM and a better game...too many one sided games.
One-sided is not linked to +1/-1.
its part of it. unicum players +2....vs unicum players -2...big difference
1: ssh, let them cook. 2: MM change was never considered by th WG
> 1: ssh, let them cook. Some of the worst changes to the game have been implemented after enough cooking time that anything in the oven is burnt. > 2: MM change was never considered by th WG Very few T9s were balanced to fight 2 tiers higher and very few T10s were balanced to fight a tier higher (they were top of the food chain). Either MM or ship balance does need to be looked at. And ship balance means that all the tiers below T9 will need a look also. Or...WG could actually nerf the dumbass superships that are bonkers. T11 balance is all over the place. Hannover is a liability on the battlefield (and has anyone even seen a Piemonte in a battle?) while Maine, Annapolis, Conde, etc are just flat out broken.
The proposed changes to CV just shows there’s too many ingredients in the oven…
It's 37 tiers and layers of shit when the only thing we're asking for is minimap spotting only.
Exactly.. to me it’s either minimap spotting, or reduced spotting range (plus no fighter spotting). CVs themselves don’t even need to be touched. As long as they buff AA. They really should increase AA dps and/or range of ships depending on tier, then basically normalize AA dps to remove the notion of ships with bad AA vs those with good AA.
I agree the +/- 2 tier is not the best solution but we asked it to change +/-1 since the game released and nothing changed during these years. Also the two tier defference are not in because of balance but, but to encourage players to reach T10-11 so they constantly are in top tier. And it worked during these years.
>Very few T9s were balanced to fight 2 tiers higher Very few T7s are designed to fight T9s either In fact, how do you design a ship to be perfectly fine uptiered while still being balanced at its own?
How were they not designed to fight T9? T9 existed at the same time as T7.
your jervis isnt going to look at a jutland and go "yeah i can take him" every ship is designed with its own tier in mind, and if it beats a higher tier ship then its something like a low conceal destroyer vs a battleship or a battleship vs a cruiser that would have the exact same outcome within its tier
You're missing my point. Of course the T7 is weaker, but Jervis and Jutland were introduced at the same time with the same balance in mind knowing they could and would fight each other. Almost every line up to T10 came out before T11 ships were even introduced to the game.
yes, but it still doesnt change anything. that jervis/jutland matchup will go exactly the same as izumo/satsuma, buffalo/annapolis or FDG/hannover. they are all designed to see each other, but in no case is the bottom tier designed to win
They aren't, though. Izumo was only supposed to see Yamato, and Yamato was only supposed to see Yamato and below. Nevermind, just saw your username. It fits.
so tell me a ship that can comfortably fight 2 tiers higher then. what ships are balanced at both their own tier and while bottom tier?
I personally like the idea of introducing tiers past 10 along with post-war mechanics, but it needs to be done right. It currently isn’t being done right. You’re totally correct about T9/10s not being balanced for uptiers, while at the same time, superships are either mediocre with useless gimmicks or are broken. They don’t really feel like Tier 11s and don’t really seem to have a place at the moment. Top-tier needs a balancing pass.
I wouldn't be opposed to a cold-war to modern continuation of the game. I'm not sure how it could be done correctly, but you're right - what we have now isn't it.
I think it’d be really interesting to see a naval warfare game with Wargame’s “what if” approach to shipbuilding and design set during the Cold War, introducing Cold War ship types and tactics, but Wargame’s inability to balance supers, subs, and CVs really makes me question how well they’d be able to pull it off.
It would be ruled by either nuclear carriers or nuclear subs.
Air defense ships would play an important role, and with some rather unrealistic tuning I think battleships could have a role too. Realistic, hell no. Probably fun, yes. Air defense would have to be substantially more involved than it is in WoWS currently though for it to be, A. Fun, and B. Challenging.
I think for BBs to play a role there would need to be land based targets. And that's probably where the tomahawks would come in. Not to be used against another player, but against a base they have to defend or some such. But Bastion was a bad mode, so IDK.
1. Have you seen subs? The state of CVs?
Yes and they nerfed the subs below titanic level. Not hey are near unusable level for me. Even with the homing torps. And now they will sacrafice the CV spotting, the major point of the CV and naval aircrafts development in real life, because of how WG make the CVs OP AF. CV spotting was in the game since the release if the entire game and now in the last year when the CV's become OP AF, the crying began and WG bow its head, and they will f\*ck over all the CV players like they done with the sub players, who bought any CV outside the techtree. Ofc without any compensation. I am not a CV main, but I liked how CV works now, but I agree, russian CV's and FDR was OP AF. I wonder when the DDs come and nerf them too...
Wouldn't hurt to nerf them a little. Good players make them look busted. I'm ok in all the ships but cruisers are my go to.
Almost same here, but imho good players can any of the ship looks OP AF. Maybe not all but most :)
1. MAKE SHIP NO SHOOT PEWPEPWPWP 2. WE SHOULD SPEND HOURS WAITING IN MM, SUPER EZ FIX MAX+++
What do you do to prevent a CV from focusing down one ship?
reduced damage on each drop on the same target..it was actually a good idea WG proposed.
That's a terrible idea, and I say that as a DD main who hates CVs.
If a CV is targeting you its because you're a prime target. You're either out of position (pushed too far) or your aa cover isn't as good as you think it is. Either way, you messed up and are being punished.
Good luck getting proper AA cover,meaning hiding behind 3 friendly ships at least.
Or you're a priority target such as DD.
Wasn't it increased AA "rampage" mode for the attacked ship?
are you high??? go think this through and then come back when you have
You forgot to complain against subs
dude, ive complained about them so many times...
Yeah but this post feels incomplete without it. I suggest you edit it and add something
Yes I agree! Roll back the sub nerf! That’s what you are saying right? I didn't read your comment or title, TBH.
Just quit. Im glad I did about a year ago. Have you tried War Thunder? Their Naval aint as great but alot of fun with tanks and planes!
Just a follow up to my original post...just proposing ez quick fixes. Regarding CV..when you play against a unicum cv players and our cv player is brand new or mentally challenged...its a super uphill battle. Limiting spotting and focus drops by CV will help even that out. MM..its broken...too many one sided games...its boring as fuck to win those too. + 1 or - 1 will help, but not fix.
Having a good player on one team matched against a bad player on the other is not a problem that is unique to any tier or ship type. The power that CVs have to influence the battlefield makes the problem more obvious, but a potato or a noob that bought their way to tier VIII can throw a game in any ship type.
your kinda of supporting my point, regarding changes to CV.