You are still not understanding of the problem in your model. As I have said multiple times, and another player, @Dodo_Dud , has said, you did not consider the fact that players will leave if they are in the queue for too long. They won’t stay forever.
Also, to apply your model in reality at all is laughable.0.0 BR spread is just 3x waiting time of 1.0 BR spread. Would you argue for a 0.0 BR spread then? It’s ridiculous, since effect in reality would be vastly worse.
Yes, you are correct, I caught the wrong number while skimming through to do the math. Point still stands though.
I don’t use the queue time argument because good lineups fix that for ground, and air doesn’t get impacted because there are no lineups.
Decompression is just objectively better than compression of BRs either compressing the matchmaker, and/or compressing the tech tree BRs.
And in reality, this idea would compress both.
This is why I continually argue against BR compression.
Less than 10% of the air BRs are currently compressed, objectively speaking. [There are 40 air BRs.]
And as people have argued, 13.0 is compressed, 9.0 is compressed… and that’s about it.
“But what about 11.3?” That’s not 11.3 being compressed that’s 13.0 being compressed. You fix 13.0’s compression and it has a knockdown impact to 11.3.
Anecdotal evidence. If you really want to use that, well, I also have some anecdotal evidence for you. I have previously spent more than 10 minutes in an Air RB queue once. Finding no matches, I left. I have also experienced multiple cases where matchmaking took multiple minutes, especially on SA server, and especially around early jet BRs.
See literally any one of my posts on this topic for why this isn’t the case.
The model seems to supply all BRs in about equal abundance. And it obviously does not much else. So no squads, no levels, no bomber limit, no top BR limit. If I omit all that, it will be much easier, sure.
I can easily prove that we need no welfare laws if all are healthy and have jobs. But is that proof relevant?
Could you please quote that definiton? Failing that, could you please explain it very slowly so that we can follow.
And to be on the safe side: You mean with MM compression to switch from 1.0 to 0.7? To avoid misunderstanding your claim.
There are two arguments made on the forums: The correct one and the compression one.
1- Decompression. Decompressing the last holdouts of BRs after an analysis of what those holdouts are. At most a couple hundred vehicles.
2- Compressing the BRs and changing the BRs over over 1000 vehicles for a compressed matchmaker from 4 to 3: 1.0 to 0.7.
This BR compression in the matchmaker would cause more overlapping vehicles, meaning different vehicles like F-104 and Mig-19S would permanently be the same BR despite the Mig-19S being objectively superior.
This would also mean that F-14B and F-15A are permanently the same BR despite them being different.
A 0.7 matchmaker solidifies BR compression into the video game and will never be cured.
This is why 4 is superior to 3, and why we need to oppose this compression in favor of BR decompression in the areas that are still impacted.
There are zillions of arguments on this forum.
The argument in this thread is not about BR changes. This is stated in line 3 of the initial post. It isn’t mentioned in the title either.
Please explain or link why switching the MM from 1.0 to 0.7 width is “compression”. A 0.7 MM would have less vehicles meet than a 1.0 one unless you also change BRs. That is the whole reason people ask for it.
Compressing the BR matchmaker REQUIRES BR changes; everyone knows this, which indicates to me people really want their specific OP plane to be more OP.
You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
Decompression is the only answer, and it’s funny to see so many people arguing against decompression for a system that makes their aircraft more OP and requires far more work than decompression.
You don’t even understand what’s compression and what’s decompression.
-Ignore list
@Nick_Cloud
I see you ignore every pro-decompression and anti-compression man on the forum.
Good lord the pro-compression crowd is sensitive.
Decompression: Decreasing the density of a volume.
In the BR system: Matchmaker: Moving from 1.0 to 1.3+.
Tech tree: Moving from 1.0 - 14.0 to 1.0 - 14.3+.
Compression: Increasing the density of a volume.
In the BR system: Matchmaker: Moving from 1.0 to 0.7-.
Tech tree: Moving from 1.0 - 14.0 to 1.0 - 13.7-.
Seriously…
It’s the opposite.
Compress - put more things in one BR range so it becomes compressed .
Decompress -less things in one BR range.
The meaning of the word tells it.
Thanks for admitting my post is correct.
Your post about the tech tree BRs is literally my statement.
That is wrong for sure, as I don’t know this.
No problem, I just buy another…
I only see one person argueing about it and it isn’t funny…
Great opinion, troll debater #69420. I am sure he will listen to whatever you are saying and not continue spewing nonsense like he always does.
@山_田_凉
Stop derailing and trolling topics with false accusations against good people.
Please tell us how decompression is nonsense and trolling…
I await an explanation on why you think decompression is bad.
Please keep the discussion respectful, people are entitled to their own opinion, simply disagree without turning this discussion into a personal matter.
Changing the max BR spread to 0.7 would be an improvement in reducing the discrepancy in performance between top tier and low tier aircraft in a match.
Trying it would be as simple as setting the max range of planes you can go up against by 0.7. This could be implemented very easily without changing every single BR of every plane.
BR spread can be used on its own or together with decompression, but BR spread reduction to 0.7 would be a great start. It doesnt make any sense to be so passionatly opposed to 0.7.
There are too many replies here, and I feel like I may not have enough energy to reply one by one. I understand that what I am doing is an ideal simulation, just like a particle in a vacuum whose charge does not decay. I completed the simulation using simplified conditions to summarize my observations. All of your responses are valuable, but there is no doubt that each of us cannot 100% predict what results using ± 0.7 will bring. Will it ruin the game or improve our gaming experience? In order to obtain this result, it is necessary to conduct a pilot experiment to determine. If gaijin really conducts pilot experiments and proves that ± 0.7 is not a good idea, I believe all its supporters will be speechless, and vice versa.
Yes, but the gaijins like it when their entire class of equipment on the entire BR is dead.
Look what happened to the US planes from the pre-tops? F-15A, F-16A, F-14A, now the F/A-18, this is an absolutely mortal class. I just wonder why they made these planes at all? Someone spent time, effort and money and all so that they would forget about it.