Jump to content


Tier 7 Heavy Tanks in 3/5/7 bottom tier

Heavy Tanks Matchmaking

  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

Fleetciws #1 Posted 15 September 2018 - 09:51 AM

    Private

  • Member
  • 6652 battles
  • 1
  • [MFH] MFH
  • Member since:
    02-23-2013

If we keep 3/5/7 as changes continue to happen to the match making system could some consideration be given to not having T7 Heavies in T9 battles.

 

The power creep required to allow T8 and T9 to complete in T10 battles as new tanks have been added has led to a massive jump in penetration, mobility, armour and alpha at both T8 and T9. This has left T7 heavies thoroughly unable to complete the any of expected roles successfully, it is unlikely they would come out in front even treading equally with a T8 light in some cases. 

 

They don't have the hull armour to resist splash from T8-T9 arty and unlike the T7 mediums and lights which can flex around the map reasonably well towards the end of the battle... T7 heavies just cannot compete. 

 

It would be amazing to test matchmaking where T7 Heavies were limited to 5/10 matchmaking or mid tier in 3/5/7, this would be a nice break point in HT progression. I can't imagine a new player in a stock T7 Heavy wanting to continue to play after 10-15 matches in a row as bottom tier in 3/5/7.



Ezz #2 Posted 15 September 2018 - 10:01 AM

    Major

  • Beta-Tester
  • 64069 battles
  • 35,097
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    07-17-2012

View PostFleetciws, on 15 September 2018 - 11:51 AM, said:

If we keep 3/5/7 as changes continue to happen to the match making system could some consideration be given to not having T7 Heavies in T9 battles.

 

The power creep required to allow T8 and T9 to complete in T10 battles as new tanks have been added has led to a massive jump in penetration, mobility, armour and alpha at both T8 and T9. This has left T7 heavies thoroughly unable to complete the any of expected roles successfully, it is unlikely they would come out in front even treading equally with a T8 light in some cases. 

 

They don't have the hull armour to resist splash from T8-T9 arty and unlike the T7 mediums and lights which can flex around the map reasonably well towards the end of the battle... T7 heavies just cannot compete. 

 

It would be amazing to test matchmaking where T7 Heavies were limited to 5/10 matchmaking or mid tier in 3/5/7, this would be a nice break point in HT progression. I can't imagine a new player in a stock T7 Heavy wanting to continue to play after 10-15 matches in a row as bottom tier in 3/5/7.

 

You'll find tier 7 lights and meds don't fare that much better. If they were going to go with +/-1 MM they'd need to do it for all tanks. But i very much doubt WG would go that direction.

Who the [edited] are you? Get Spoofed! "wouldn't be a proper WG balance change if they didn't [edited] something up after all "

>9000 cynicism brought to you by P2W, RIP Balance and the Cartoon Connection

Currently moderating your English speaking community : AALGMadibaCenturion_NZ, Elite911, Moonbase Patrol Copter 7

R. Pubbie: "why are all PBKAC players so rude, arrogant and nasty? and why do Mods favor them?"


mttspiii #3 Posted 15 September 2018 - 10:38 AM

    Major

  • Beta-Tester
  • 29172 battles
  • 16,586
  • [PVP] PVP
  • Member since:
    04-15-2012
Except well, tier 7 MT's are having a fun time being always top tier.

I'm fierce and I'm feeling mighty,

I'm a golden girl, I'm an Aphrodite

 

 


Aoyama_Blue_Mountain #4 Posted 15 September 2018 - 11:00 AM

    Is the order a blue mountain?

  • Beta-Tester
  • 68537 battles
  • 7,220
  • [WAT] WAT
  • Member since:
    05-30-2012

View Postmttspiii, on 15 September 2018 - 10:38 AM, said:

 

Tier 7 preferential MM MTs 

 

I even wrote in the post

Block Quote

 - Why do tier 7 normal MM tanks meet pretty much 987 MM exclusively, when there are so many 876 battles available that the MM could have slotted tier 7 normal MM tanks into?

 

 


Edited by Aoyama_Blue_Mountain, 15 September 2018 - 11:00 AM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users