Some comments on the new MM
Killtech
16 Jul 2012
certainly the new MM is an improvement over the old but it is still not ideal. though the tier spread is more limited now this will not prevent frustrating match making. for example following random team composition is still possible: 10 tanks are tier VII, 3 are tier VI and only 2 are tier V (special matching rules for artillery and light tanks not considered). evidently driving a M4 Sherman in such a battle will be not so much fun (though much better then having to face Type 59)
thus i think there should be additional simple rule applied:
the lowest tier tanks should constitute at least half of the tanks in each random battle.
or more general:
in every random battle the total number of tanks of a certain tier must be strictly greater then the sum of all tanks above that tier.
an example: in a battle with tanks with tiers between VIII to X (new battle tier 10, current 11), if there are 2 tier X and 4 tier IX then there must be at least 7 tier VIII's (and 3 tier IX's which is fulfilled).
EDIT: not that tier spread will be limited to 2 but it is no more enforced. this means that it can be something between 2 and 0. thus battles with only two tiers (e.g. t7 and t8 only) will be much more common, especially if a bottom tier heavy pyramid distribution rule is introduced. queuing will not be prolonged because there were similar restrictive rules earlier (forcing the tier spread). in fact the number of allowed combinations might be even greater allowing 'faster' matching.
EDIT2: to address the concerns i suggest the following modification to the previous matching rule:
in every random battle the number of tier T tanks must exceed the number of tier T+1 tanks (by at least one).
this allows a much steeper pyramid. it also ensures there are enough tanks to damage the top tiers (e.g. if there are 2 t8 there must be at least 3 t7). the rule prevents a tier gap, too (e.g. t8 and t6 tanks only with no t7 which is possible now).
Edited by Killtech, 16 July 2012 - 04:20 PM.
thus i think there should be additional simple rule applied:
the lowest tier tanks should constitute at least half of the tanks in each random battle.
or more general:
in every random battle the total number of tanks of a certain tier must be strictly greater then the sum of all tanks above that tier.
an example: in a battle with tanks with tiers between VIII to X (new battle tier 10, current 11), if there are 2 tier X and 4 tier IX then there must be at least 7 tier VIII's (and 3 tier IX's which is fulfilled).
EDIT: not that tier spread will be limited to 2 but it is no more enforced. this means that it can be something between 2 and 0. thus battles with only two tiers (e.g. t7 and t8 only) will be much more common, especially if a bottom tier heavy pyramid distribution rule is introduced. queuing will not be prolonged because there were similar restrictive rules earlier (forcing the tier spread). in fact the number of allowed combinations might be even greater allowing 'faster' matching.
EDIT2: to address the concerns i suggest the following modification to the previous matching rule:
in every random battle the number of tier T tanks must exceed the number of tier T+1 tanks (by at least one).
this allows a much steeper pyramid. it also ensures there are enough tanks to damage the top tiers (e.g. if there are 2 t8 there must be at least 3 t7). the rule prevents a tier gap, too (e.g. t8 and t6 tanks only with no t7 which is possible now).
Edited by Killtech, 16 July 2012 - 04:20 PM.
Harim
16 Jul 2012
Do u expect this suggestions will be read by any WG dev? This forum is only called official, but it is officially ignored.
It took 2 years of complaining to reduce the battle-tier-spread, finally we will get it (hopefully, but we are talking of WG dev, so it is still possible, that they remove it for... certain reasons... think of the smart-matchmaking system...).
All other suggestions concerning the matchmaking system were ignored since the last 2 years, so, u maybe right with your post, but, sad but true, it is just a waste of time.
It took 2 years of complaining to reduce the battle-tier-spread, finally we will get it (hopefully, but we are talking of WG dev, so it is still possible, that they remove it for... certain reasons... think of the smart-matchmaking system...).
All other suggestions concerning the matchmaking system were ignored since the last 2 years, so, u maybe right with your post, but, sad but true, it is just a waste of time.
wordsmith
16 Jul 2012
As I wrote several times on forum, the problem of MM is not tier spread but tier distribution. Games now are like this:
While it should be like this:
The MM should follow the pyramid structure of tiers, no wonder it's not fun for the lowest tiers to play if the MM is like in 1st picture...
While it should be like this:
The MM should follow the pyramid structure of tiers, no wonder it's not fun for the lowest tiers to play if the MM is like in 1st picture...
Mike_Shinoda
16 Jul 2012
I don't think so, because:
1) It would be way to easy for the top tiers to get lots of kills (I think WG want it to be more fair when getting 'top gun', not just by killing off tanks that cant hurt you)
2) It would be super unlikely anyone to ever again get the epic achievements of 'killing 3 tanks 2 tiers higher then you.' If there are 2 or 3 tier 10s, and your tier 8, at least one of them will be on the other side of the map and no need to go into details of why you wont get those epic medals anymore.
I think the new MM will be great, no changes needed, at least for now.
1) It would be way to easy for the top tiers to get lots of kills (I think WG want it to be more fair when getting 'top gun', not just by killing off tanks that cant hurt you)
2) It would be super unlikely anyone to ever again get the epic achievements of 'killing 3 tanks 2 tiers higher then you.' If there are 2 or 3 tier 10s, and your tier 8, at least one of them will be on the other side of the map and no need to go into details of why you wont get those epic medals anymore.
I think the new MM will be great, no changes needed, at least for now.
MarsRover
16 Jul 2012
wordsmith, on 16 July 2012 - 06:33 AM, said:
As I wrote several times on forum, the problem of MM is not tier spread but tier distribution. Games now are like this:
While it should be like this:
The MM should follow the pyramid structure of tiers, no wonder it's not fun for the lowest tiers to play if the MM is like in 1st picture...
While it should be like this:
The MM should follow the pyramid structure of tiers, no wonder it's not fun for the lowest tiers to play if the MM is like in 1st picture...
So why are your tanks in the negative side of the graph exactly?
Brachiaraidos
16 Jul 2012
wordsmith, on 16 July 2012 - 06:33 AM, said:
The MM should follow the pyramid structure of tiers, no wonder it's not fun for the lowest tiers to play if the MM is like in 1st picture...
And better still, the closer spread of the MM now means that, -ideally-, there should only be three tiers fighting on any given map. It's far from ideal- but shooting at tanks only 2 tiers above you is viable. You can do damage, if you learn to aim.
More so, the top tier tank suddenly becomes important (and an arty magnet). Where he goes will make a big impact on the flow of the battle. Lines become less static because the rarity of the highest tier tanks makes pushing through the usual camping lines more possible- as opposed to the rariy of the one KV trying desperately to make an impact on a team of almost all IS's.
But hey! WG are far too busy releasing premium tanks to implement it soon. So let's just dream of a day when we're allowed a pyramid structure.
typhaon
16 Jul 2012
With a few exceptions, any tank out there can do something against enemies that are two tiers above. The pyramid distribution might look good at the first sight, but in fact it would only allow the top tier tank a fragfest.... if you say a Sherman cannot do something against T7 tanks... would it be better, if your team had 4 Shermans against the T7 left?
The new matchmaker should be fine. There are only three possible battles for each tank now:
1. You are top tank with tanks one or two tiers below.
2. You are bottom tank with tanks one or two tiers above.
3. You are in the middle with tanks one tier above and below.
So in 2/3 of all your battles, you will only face enemies of your tier or one tier above... which should be easy enough.
The new matchmaker should be fine. There are only three possible battles for each tank now:
1. You are top tank with tanks one or two tiers below.
2. You are bottom tank with tanks one or two tiers above.
3. You are in the middle with tanks one tier above and below.
So in 2/3 of all your battles, you will only face enemies of your tier or one tier above... which should be easy enough.
Chmee
16 Jul 2012
The problem with pyramid is that you won't find enough candidates for lower tier slots. The current MM reflects the current tier distribution and you can't do much about players' preferences. The solution proposed by you would mean World of Waiting in the queue for all those high tier vehicles owners.
Ahh, and regarding the developers reaction. They would probably introduce this new system earlier if the amount of players guaranteed decent waiting times. I remember times when WG celebrated 20k players online. Now it oscilates around 90k so you/they/MM has the pool to choose from and assure short waiting queues even with narrower MM criteria.
Edited by Chmee, 16 July 2012 - 07:56 AM.
Ahh, and regarding the developers reaction. They would probably introduce this new system earlier if the amount of players guaranteed decent waiting times. I remember times when WG celebrated 20k players online. Now it oscilates around 90k so you/they/MM has the pool to choose from and assure short waiting queues even with narrower MM criteria.
Edited by Chmee, 16 July 2012 - 07:56 AM.
Brachiaraidos
16 Jul 2012
So one tier 7 tank vs. tier sixes/fives is a fragfest, but tier sixes having to shoot at numerous tier sevens (and eights or fives) is suddenly a-okay? That fragfest for the one tier 7 has suddenly become everything on the bottom half of the board has no real purpose but to look pretty and hope to find the other tier 5 to shoot, because the number of highest tier tanks renders their small impact on said tiers useless.
4 shermans can wolf pack one T7. 4 shermans cannot do much against a team with eight tier 7's.
And you know what? I would rather see longer waiting queues, any day. My current wait is >20 seconds at any given time. Wait a minute for a game with decent tier distribution? Yes please!
And the only tiers that will be negatively impacted on wait times will be tiers 9 and 10, because of the limitations of tier spreading. Everyone else will have the occasional jaunt in the top spot, and a bunch of times somewhere in the middle.
And you know what? If the wait is happening that much, here's a novel solution: take all the waiting tanks, and dump them into a split game of two tiers. Especially relevant for T9 and T10. Let them fight each other, and leave the poor T8's (and sometimes 7's) out of the T10 boomfest.
Edited by Brachiaraidos, 16 July 2012 - 07:55 AM.
4 shermans can wolf pack one T7. 4 shermans cannot do much against a team with eight tier 7's.
And you know what? I would rather see longer waiting queues, any day. My current wait is >20 seconds at any given time. Wait a minute for a game with decent tier distribution? Yes please!
And the only tiers that will be negatively impacted on wait times will be tiers 9 and 10, because of the limitations of tier spreading. Everyone else will have the occasional jaunt in the top spot, and a bunch of times somewhere in the middle.
And you know what? If the wait is happening that much, here's a novel solution: take all the waiting tanks, and dump them into a split game of two tiers. Especially relevant for T9 and T10. Let them fight each other, and leave the poor T8's (and sometimes 7's) out of the T10 boomfest.
Edited by Brachiaraidos, 16 July 2012 - 07:55 AM.
Lord_Demon
16 Jul 2012
I was in a game recently, with one tier 8 on both sides (Me in ferdi, enemy in KV-5), others were tier 5 (maybe two tier 6).
Me and KV 5 happened to go different routes, so he killed pretty much half the team himself, I got a kill or two but was unable to push the other flank because enemy had better spotters and I was in danger of getting flanked.
While tier 5 and 6 can damage and even destroy tier 8 tanks in capable hands, most of the players seem to be unable to do that. Having single high tier would actually make the game really dependant on those high tier tanks.
If anything, I'd like to have a even spread. If we have 3 tiers in combat, a third of team should be top tier, a third mid tier and a third bottom tier. This would lessen the high tier effect, while lowtiers would have more targets. Or even 25%-50%-25% spread, focusing mostly on middle tier.
Me and KV 5 happened to go different routes, so he killed pretty much half the team himself, I got a kill or two but was unable to push the other flank because enemy had better spotters and I was in danger of getting flanked.
While tier 5 and 6 can damage and even destroy tier 8 tanks in capable hands, most of the players seem to be unable to do that. Having single high tier would actually make the game really dependant on those high tier tanks.
If anything, I'd like to have a even spread. If we have 3 tiers in combat, a third of team should be top tier, a third mid tier and a third bottom tier. This would lessen the high tier effect, while lowtiers would have more targets. Or even 25%-50%-25% spread, focusing mostly on middle tier.
tango_delta
16 Jul 2012
Basically the smaller tanks in battles are now more important. This means two things. First off the top tiers are less important and also need to play better because there is no more cannon fodder tanks. There are more tanks on battlefield that can hurt you. This means bad players will get obliterated more often by good players in lower tier tanks but also that good players can do more in lower tier tanks in battles. Lower tier spread means player skill has slightly bigger effect because on average you face tanks that vary less in performance compared to the tank you are driving. The smaller the difference between the tanks the better the chance for skill to overcome the difference. Even if you are the only lowest tier tank the 2 tier spread above you is still small enough to make you important.
The another positive is that afker/idiots/tkers in t10 tanks have harder time breaking the game because one t10 is not so awfully important anymore. For example in a team with equal number of tiers from 10 to 6 losing one t10 means losing about 15% to 25% of the total battleweight of your team. And more importantly losing possibly the only t10 you have. If the rest of the tanks are t8, t7 and t6 it is clear that such loss is felt heavily. But with new mm one single tank is not so important anymore because in t10 match the lowest cannon fodder is still t8 which can hurt t10.
I don't really see special restrictions doable. The wot tank distrubution in randoms is very bottom heavy meaning that the lower tier you go the more there are such tanks playing. In such environment it is hard to get equal numbers of t7, t6 and t5 tanks in one battle simple because there are probably much more t5 tanks than t7 tanks waiting in queues to get into matches...
The another positive is that afker/idiots/tkers in t10 tanks have harder time breaking the game because one t10 is not so awfully important anymore. For example in a team with equal number of tiers from 10 to 6 losing one t10 means losing about 15% to 25% of the total battleweight of your team. And more importantly losing possibly the only t10 you have. If the rest of the tanks are t8, t7 and t6 it is clear that such loss is felt heavily. But with new mm one single tank is not so important anymore because in t10 match the lowest cannon fodder is still t8 which can hurt t10.
I don't really see special restrictions doable. The wot tank distrubution in randoms is very bottom heavy meaning that the lower tier you go the more there are such tanks playing. In such environment it is hard to get equal numbers of t7, t6 and t5 tanks in one battle simple because there are probably much more t5 tanks than t7 tanks waiting in queues to get into matches...
wordsmith
16 Jul 2012
typhaon, on 16 July 2012 - 07:38 AM, said:
...The pyramid distribution might look good at the first sight, but in fact it would only allow the top tier tank a fragfest....
The teams then would have to play more tactically, to scout 1st where are top tiers and what they can do to kill them (wolfpack or arty).
But I understand that such MM is hard to achieve and would put very much pressure on top tiers - if top tier tank would be a good player, he could alone decide whole match in such case...
We will see how new MM will be. IMO it will never be ideal.
DeathByDribbling
16 Jul 2012
What teir 7 can an M4 not damage?
It can damage all of them (from the front if you use derp gun).
If it can damage them it can kill them.
So in actual fact in your graph the whole enemy team should be orange.
Edited by DeathByDribbling, 16 July 2012 - 09:34 AM.
It can damage all of them (from the front if you use derp gun).
If it can damage them it can kill them.
So in actual fact in your graph the whole enemy team should be orange.
Edited by DeathByDribbling, 16 July 2012 - 09:34 AM.
typhaon
16 Jul 2012
wordsmith, on 16 July 2012 - 09:22 AM, said:
The teams then would have to play more tactically, to scout 1st where are top tiers and what they can do to kill them (wolfpack or arty).
But I understand that such MM is hard to achieve and would put very much pressure on top tiers - if top tier tank would be a good player, he could alone decide whole match in such case...
We will see how new MM will be. IMO it will never be ideal.
But I understand that such MM is hard to achieve and would put very much pressure on top tiers - if top tier tank would be a good player, he could alone decide whole match in such case...
We will see how new MM will be. IMO it will never be ideal.
Teamplay and useful scouting in WoT... that's a great joke
Seriously... the pyramid distribution cannot be achieved because of the different numbers in different tiers... what about T10 tanks... only two T10 tanks per battle because there can only be two top tier tanks? How many battles would you need to get all T10 players playing?
I think with the new MM every player has the chance to do some damage or even have an impact on the battle... I have no problem with fighting T7 in my T5...
Brachiaraidos
16 Jul 2012
typhaon, on 16 July 2012 - 09:36 AM, said:
Teamplay and useful scouting in WoT... that's a great joke
Seriously... the pyramid distribution cannot be achieved because of the different numbers in different tiers... what about T10 tanks... only two T10 tanks per battle because there can only be two top tier tanks? How many battles would you need to get all T10 players playing?
I think with the new MM every player has the chance to do some damage or even have an impact on the battle... I have no problem with fighting T7 in my T5...
Seriously... the pyramid distribution cannot be achieved because of the different numbers in different tiers... what about T10 tanks... only two T10 tanks per battle because there can only be two top tier tanks? How many battles would you need to get all T10 players playing?
I think with the new MM every player has the chance to do some damage or even have an impact on the battle... I have no problem with fighting T7 in my T5...
Tier 10's get fights full of tier 10's (and 9's), if there are enough waiting. They already do, it'll be nothing new.
And fighting one tier 7 is fine. Two or three can be dealt with. Being the only tier 5 per team, with three of four tier 6's, and the rest 7's? You become nothing more than a free frag for a larger tank, unless you get lucky as hell.
2ndaryBattleTank
16 Jul 2012
typhaon, on 16 July 2012 - 07:38 AM, said:
The pyramid distribution might look good at the first sight, but in fact it would only allow the top tier tank a fragfest....
Yes,most such matches will probably end up like this. Recently I was at the top of the pyramid with my Tiger II, the only tier VIII heavy in the game. Without playing particularly well I had a Top Gun, Steel Wall, Sniper and Defender. Could have had a Bölter but ran out of targets. Very unfair for all those tier Vs and VIs that just couldn't really damage me. And yet, with a tier V tank I would rather have been in this match, which had lots of other tier Vs in it than in one where there are only one or two and the rest are all higher tiers. At least you would have a good chance of running into something you can actually kill. Of course victory will very much depend on the performance of a single top tier tank, which can be frustrating, but I'll take that over not being able to find anything of my own tier.
Better yet though would be to really reduce the tier spread so that there would be only two possibilities:
A) You are top tier. The lowest tiers in the match are one tier below you.
B) You are bottom tier. The highest tiers in the match are one tier above you.
(With appropriate exceptions for scouts, SPGs and TDs)
This limited tier spread is actually present in tier I and II and they are by far the best in all of WoT with regards to consistently fun MM. In those matches you know you will always be able to confidently go 1 v 1 whatever you might run into. Because at one tier difference skill is still the most important factor determining the outcome of a fight. Any more and the difference in tier is almost always decisive.
Edited by 2ndaryBattleTank, 16 July 2012 - 10:09 AM.
TallyHoChaps
16 Jul 2012
The chart from wordsmith would make for excellent games. However, you would need to know how many tanks there are from each tier playing on the server at any one time to understand whether this would work or not. If there are not enough lower tier tanks to fill these games then there will be a lot of queueing time.
The most interesting game I can remember for a while happened last Friday. Each team had one Tier 8 tank. The rest were Tier 5 with a couple of Tier 4s. There were no T6 or T7 tanks on either side. It made for really interesting gameplay. My gameplay was bizzarre because of this. When I managed to sideblock their Ferdinand in my T-34, I was happy to take damage from the lower tier tanks just to keep damaging their key tank and to keep its gun neutralised.
Weird stuff but definitely more interesting than normal fare.
The most interesting game I can remember for a while happened last Friday. Each team had one Tier 8 tank. The rest were Tier 5 with a couple of Tier 4s. There were no T6 or T7 tanks on either side. It made for really interesting gameplay. My gameplay was bizzarre because of this. When I managed to sideblock their Ferdinand in my T-34, I was happy to take damage from the lower tier tanks just to keep damaging their key tank and to keep its gun neutralised.
Weird stuff but definitely more interesting than normal fare.
Brachiaraidos
16 Jul 2012
One tier 8 a side? Sure, okay, that could prove interesting.
This is what we call 'Waste of time tier 5's', though:
https://dl.dropbox.c...17/shot_002.jpg
This is what we call 'Waste of time tier 5's', though:
https://dl.dropbox.c...17/shot_002.jpg
Phitt
16 Jul 2012
2ndaryBattleTank, on 16 July 2012 - 10:01 AM, said:
Better yet though would be to really reduce the tier spread so that there would be only two possibilities:
A) You are top tier. The lowest tiers in the match are one tier below you.
B) You are bottom tier. The highest tiers in the match are one tier above you.
(With appropriate exceptions for scouts, SPGs and TDs)
This limited tier spread is actually present in tier I and II and they are by far the best in all of WoT with regards to consistently fun MM. In those matches you know you will always be able to confidently go 1 v 1 whatever you might run into. Because at one tier difference skill is still the most important factor determining the outcome of a fight. Any more and the difference in tier is almost always decisive.
A) You are top tier. The lowest tiers in the match are one tier below you.
B) You are bottom tier. The highest tiers in the match are one tier above you.
(With appropriate exceptions for scouts, SPGs and TDs)
This limited tier spread is actually present in tier I and II and they are by far the best in all of WoT with regards to consistently fun MM. In those matches you know you will always be able to confidently go 1 v 1 whatever you might run into. Because at one tier difference skill is still the most important factor determining the outcome of a fight. Any more and the difference in tier is almost always decisive.
That is exactly the matchmaking fix that I was hoping for. And the only fix that would really make this game enjoyable no matter what matchmaking you get.
There are a lot of people on this forum unfortunately who claim they constantly defeat tanks 2+ tiers higher than their own. For some strange reason I never met someone like that, they only seem to exist on the forum. In more than 2000 battles I've never been defeated by a tank two tiers lower than my own in a 1 vs 1 fight when I had >50% health left. It's simply not possible unless you have an ideal situation (like a clumsy TD or heavy as the only tank left out on an open field getting circled by a light tank, a player afk or simply a complete retard player).
One tier higher is still a rather big advantage, but at least you can somewhat make up for it if you are the low tier by playing well. But two tiers higher is simply too much.
Well, at least it's becoming a bit better now, though sitting in a t5 facing 10 t7 tanks is hardly any better than facing 1-2 t8 and 3-4 t7 tanks in a t5 like it was before. And t2 matchmaking will get raped as well, since now at t2 you'll meet t3 TDs.
