620 replies to this topic

[somnamber]

How about changing the way your match making works?  I’ve played lots where my team has only a thousand or so xp but the enemy has tens or hundreds of thousands.  Doesn’t seem at all fail

 

 

[RibbleStripe]

somnamber, on 01 June 2018 - 10:34 PM, said:

How about changing the way your match making works?  I’ve played lots where my team has only a thousand or so xp but the enemy has tens or hundreds of thousands.  Doesn’t seem at all fail

 

 

 

That's how random battles work. Experienced players can be your enemies or allies with the same chance. If you don't like random matchmaker you can fight in rating battles.

[RoadKutter]

RibbleStripe, on 06 June 2018 - 03:30 AM, said:

 

That's how random battles work. Experienced players can be your enemies or allies with the same chance. If you don't like random matchmaker you can fight in rating battles.

 

Lol, who has 10 minutes to wait around for one match? A lot of times there is only enough players for 3v3. 

[Only_Monica]

RoadKutter, on 06 June 2018 - 08:10 AM, said:

 

Lol, who has 10 minutes to wait around for one match? A lot of times there is only enough players for 3v3. 

 

Nevermind that, consider that some of our top players in the NA barely made it into Platinum and if I remember correctly nobody made it into diamond.

 

I got put in the Top of the Silver League, I no for a fact I am not the best player but determining my rating solely on the whole team really doesn't reflect well, especially when I have a 5k damage heart breaker and I still get dinged really hard.

 

 

[theFANTASTICfox]

Only_Monica, on 06 June 2018 - 08:33 AM, said:

 

Nevermind that, consider that some of our top players in the NA barely made it into Platinum and if I remember correctly nobody made it into diamond.

 

I got put in the Top of the Silver League, I no for a fact I am not the best player but determining my rating solely on the whole team really doesn't reflect well, especially when I have a 5k damage heart breaker and I still get dinged really hard.

 

 

 

I got thrown into the lower gold league

 

After spending months getting up to 4800 rating

[Petesjk]

theFANTASTICfox, on 06 June 2018 - 06:57 PM, said:

 

I got thrown into the lower gold league

 

After spending months getting up to 4800 rating

 

It’s crazy, and it doesn’t make any sense.  I would see all these players with higher ratings, but win rates under 45%.  You would expect ratings games to weed out people like this, instead it only seems to encourage freeloading.  My hope with ratings games was that it would only attract the better, competitive players, but it clearly doesn’t.  I see a lot of kids using it for practice since it doesn’t count towards their record, and they get more rewards than regular games.  The gameplay ends up being more frustrating than regular games.  This isn’t worth waiting for.  Plus half the time I experience lag.  Blitz needs some reorganization, especially with their servers.

Edited by Petesjk, 06 June 2018 - 09:53 PM.

[_MuleSkinner_]

RibbleStripe, on 06 June 2018 - 06:30 AM, said:

 

That's how random battles work. Experienced players can be your enemies or allies with the same chance. If you don't like random matchmaker you can fight in rating battles.

 Corporate searing of conscience. Hope you get out before its too late. Same chance schmance.

[11H2P_1_505th_PIR]

this whole balance garbage is just that.... garbage! ive been playing this game since late 2014 and i chose my veh.'s based on the characteristics they had at the time... no updated nerfed them... heck i didnt think that was a possibity... i mean how can you balance the historical characteristics if something? especially war eqipment---improvements is how it works in the real world.. adding to capabilties, but never reducing  them.

i served 6 years as a anti-armour parachute-infantryman and i dont recall any frickn balancing accuring back then i even spent my last enlistment working with arms manufacturers (ratheon, lockead-marten) developing infantry anti-armour weapon systems....  i know soft-bodied tech guys no nothing of what im talking about and i bet would puke if they just smelled a tank after  it had been smoked; on the other gand,   screwing those of us that worked hard for our tanks so the unskilled can stay unskilled by "balancing" isnt so hard for them

Balance shmalance! if the tanks are weaker in some characteristic than others... well u use to have to develope and hone ur skills to be effectively competitive... i never had the feeling of getting screwed until all this "balancing" speak and emplemetation therof started... wot is either listening to the whiners feedback; or the reasons have another intent... (they know what im talking about... dont ya'll) well wg wont gett any from me till it stops... oh and ur MM balancing (again they know what im talking about) stops as well.. at least with my acount... make me loyal again and i got no problem helping to add to the revinue flow... nit till then tho. 

off my soap box now.

[VikkoTheTusken]

11H2P_1_505th_PIR, on 08 June 2018 - 11:44 PM, said:

this whole balance garbage is just that.... garbage! ive been playing this game since late 2014 and i chose my veh.'s based on the characteristics they had at the time... no updated nerfed them... heck i didnt think that was a possibity... i mean how can you balance the historical characteristics if something? especially war eqipment---improvements is how it works in the real world.. adding to capabilties, but never reducing  them.

i served 6 years as a anti-armour parachute-infantryman and i dont recall any frickn balancing accuring back then i even spent my last enlistment working with arms manufacturers (ratheon, lockead-marten) developing infantry anti-armour weapon systems....  i know soft-bodied tech guys no nothing of what im talking about and i bet would puke if they just smelled a tank after  it had been smoked; on the other gand,   screwing those of us that worked hard for our tanks so the unskilled can stay unskilled by "balancing" isnt so hard for them

Balance shmalance! if the tanks are weaker in some characteristic than others... well u use to have to develope and hone ur skills to be effectively competitive... i never had the feeling of getting screwed until all this "balancing" speak and emplemetation therof started... wot is either listening to the whiners feedback; or the reasons have another intent... (they know what im talking about... dont ya'll) well wg wont gett any from me till it stops... oh and ur MM balancing (again they know what im talking about) stops as well.. at least with my acount... make me loyal again and i got no problem helping to add to the revinue flow... nit till then tho. 

off my soap box now.

 

The misspellings and your ERB as your avatar handle make my 20 years and 31B5M_8_D7_V5_1B insist that you sit this one out. 

 

Edited by VikkoTheTusken, 10 June 2018 - 11:04 PM.

[foresSTgumP]

Love the gif tusken

[Kiilu]

oicram1, on 14 May 2018 - 07:24 PM, said:

Would it be too much to ask for a tiny buff to the pen go the Type 62?? Just a touch please Ribble?

 

Yes it needs help

[Freejack1977]

RibbleStripe, on 06 June 2018 - 11:30 AM, said:

 

That's how random battles work. Experienced players can be your enemies or allies with the same chance. If you don't like random matchmaker you can fight in rating battles.

 

How about WG fix the Rating so you don't wait 10 min in the queue, this is very poor solution you are offering here, I understand you are the face of the company on the forum and only can relay things that WG will actually do, but it's awful user experience and I speak as professional in the field. The way that application code is refactored and constant performance issue that you guys have on the servers, doesn't take much to figure out that your latency for production server is just awful there is no other word to describe it. Regression testing scope WG covers isn't impressive at all as you guys constantly introducing new bugs. This is the user experience we are getting on ALL servers not just NA. 

Edited by Freejack1977, 13 June 2018 - 03:53 PM.

[RibbleStripe]

Freejack1977, on 13 June 2018 - 06:52 PM, said:

 

How about WG fix the Rating so you don't wait 10 min in the queue, this is very poor solution you are offering here, I understand you are the face of the company on the forum and only can relay things that WG will actually do, but it's awful user experience and I speak as professional in the field. The way that application code is refactored and constant performance issue that you guys have on the servers, doesn't take much to figure out that your latency for production server is just awful there is no other word to describe it. Regression testing scope WG covers isn't impressive at all as you guys constantly introducing new bugs. This is the user experience we are getting on ALL servers not just NA. 

 

The only way to reduce waiting time is to soften matchmaker requirements and to let him put together players with significant rating differences. Making such changes are controversial to say the least. Can we call such mode rating battles if we do that? I don't think so...

[Freejack1977]

RibbleStripe, on 14 June 2018 - 08:55 AM, said:

 

The only way to reduce waiting time is to soften matchmaker requirements and to let him put together players with significant rating differences. Making such changes are controversial to say the least. Can we call such mode rating battles if we do that? I don't think so...

 

This question for company architects and designers, but my point is client side suffers either way so it's not a good solution.  The whole user experience is broken here in my opinion.

[Chariot_Solace]

RibbleStripe, on 14 June 2018 - 02:55 AM, said:

 

The only way to reduce waiting time is to soften matchmaker requirements and to let him put together players with significant rating differences. Making such changes are controversial to say the least. Can we call such mode rating battles if we do that? I don't think so...

 

What about the queue times for platoons in ratings battles? They are ridiculously long. I’ve waited 10 minutes without getting into a battle. If I remember correctly it’s because the match maker is trying to find an extremely similar platoon to match you against. This is totally unnecessary in my opinion. It’s already a ratings battle where everyone is of similar skill, so it shouldn’t matter if one team has a platoon and not the other.

[BrickSniper33A]

Ribble, I see that WG has (according to my sources) decided to make the FV201 (A45) a tier 8 premium heavy tank.

 I've played the tank a few times on PC, and it is far from what I would call a competitive tier 7 heavy. With none-existent hull armor, a terribly mediocre 17pdr, average mobility, and a temperamental turret.

 

So I'm inclined to ask, what plans does WG have for making this a competitive tier 8 heavy tank? Because honestly, if all you guys are doing with it is basically making it 10% better over all then bumping it up a tier, well I think the Panther 8,8 will have a new rival for 'Worst Tank In Tier Eight.'

 

[Oicraftian]

BrickSniper33A, on 14 June 2018 - 07:21 PM, said:

Ribble, I see that WG has (according to my sources) decided to make the FV201 (A45) a tier 8 premium heavy tank.

 I've played the tank a few times on PC, and it is far from what I would call a competitive tier 7 heavy. With none-existent hull armor, a terribly mediocre 17pdr, average mobility, and a temperamental turret.

 

So I'm inclined to ask, what plans does WG have for making this a competitive tier 8 heavy tank? Because honestly, if all you guys are doing with it is basically making it 10% better over all then bumping it up a tier, well I think the Panther 8,8 will have a new rival for 'Worst Tank In Tier Eight.'

 

SU-101 

[matshmoto]

Apoyo eso

[Dan_Deerso]

11H2P_1_505th_PIR, on 08 June 2018 - 11:44 PM, said:

this whole balance garbage is just that.... garbage! ive been playing this game since late 2014 and i chose my veh.'s based on the characteristics they had at the time... no updated nerfed them... heck i didnt think that was a possibity... i mean how can you balance the historical characteristics if something? especially war eqipment---improvements is how it works in the real world.. adding to capabilties, but never reducing  them.

i served 6 years as a anti-armour parachute-infantryman and i dont recall any frickn balancing accuring back then i even spent my last enlistment working with arms manufacturers (ratheon, lockead-marten) developing infantry anti-armour weapon systems....  i know soft-bodied tech guys no nothing of what im talking about and i bet would puke if they just smelled a tank after  it had been smoked; on the other gand,   screwing those of us that worked hard for our tanks so the unskilled can stay unskilled by "balancing" isnt so hard for them

Balance shmalance! if the tanks are weaker in some characteristic than others... well u use to have to develope and hone ur skills to be effectively competitive... i never had the feeling of getting screwed until all this "balancing" speak and emplemetation therof started... wot is either listening to the whiners feedback; or the reasons have another intent... (they know what im talking about... dont ya'll) well wg wont gett any from me till it stops... oh and ur MM balancing (again they know what im talking about) stops as well.. at least with my acount... make me loyal again and i got no problem helping to add to the revinue flow... nit till then tho. 

off my soap box now.

 

So, what I'm reading here in this mess of a "paragraph", term used loosely, is that you want to be able to pick a tank off of the tech tree that can overwhelm others of a similar tier without input of skill from the driver. Or maybe you're still under the incorrect assumption that Matchmaker takes account of skill in random matches. It does not. Improve your ability to convey ideas, please.

 

The system isn't rigged against you, if anything the whole game is rigged in your favor as a player of average ability, as all tanks that require some level of skill to make shine are constantly having those little quirks filed off. This means the gap between you and a good player is that much smaller, giving you a better chance of winning in a fight.

I'll be happy to explain the finer points if you'd like to, just give the word.

[michaeItsoon]

11H2P_1_505th_PIR, on 09 June 2018 - 03:44 AM, said:

this whole balance garbage is just that.... garbage! ive been playing this game since late 2014 and i chose my veh.'s based on the characteristics they had at the time... no updated nerfed them... heck i didnt think that was a possibity... i mean how can you balance the historical characteristics if something? especially war eqipment---improvements is how it works in the real world.. adding to capabilties, but never reducing  them.

i served 6 years as a anti-armour parachute-infantryman and i dont recall any frickn balancing accuring back then i even spent my last enlistment working with arms manufacturers (ratheon, lockead-marten) developing infantry anti-armour weapon systems....  i know soft-bodied tech guys no nothing of what im talking about and i bet would puke if they just smelled a tank after  it had been smoked; on the other gand,   screwing those of us that worked hard for our tanks so the unskilled can stay unskilled by "balancing" isnt so hard for them

Balance shmalance! if the tanks are weaker in some characteristic than others... well u use to have to develope and hone ur skills to be effectively competitive... i never had the feeling of getting screwed until all this "balancing" speak and emplemetation therof started... wot is either listening to the whiners feedback; or the reasons have another intent... (they know what im talking about... dont ya'll) well wg wont gett any from me till it stops... oh and ur MM balancing (again they know what im talking about) stops as well.. at least with my acount... make me loyal again and i got no problem helping to add to the revinue flow... nit till then tho. 

off my soap box now.

 

"Anti-armor parachute infantryman"

 

Lol wut?