Jump to content


history of the MM (and why there is no number cap for any vehicle)


  • Please log in to reply
81 replies to this topic

tadada #1 Posted 02 November 2012 - 01:54 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 11434 battles
  • 1,785
  • [FT-RO] FT-RO
  • Member since:
    07-20-2010

*
POPULAR

disclamer: both I and anyone discussing here should always consider the "opposite side" as speaking sincerely and reasonably. any doubt should be highlighted and is a peril to the discussion. ok? start!


the MM history, before WoT ever existed

I, some of the early game devs in WG and some players around here have already been in a game very similar with this one (navy field, EU and US server).
similar in: room with players, split in teams, battle, results.
it was 2d, but the way the battles and play experience were organized were greatly similar.
I played it something like 5 years, +/- 6 months, from NF beta till WoT close beta start, some of the devs too.

what the MM does in WoT is a direct experience of NF MM.
they took the idea from there and made only a step or two forward.

what happened in NF, in terms of MM?
it was a evolution process, with several stages:

1. two types of open rooms in which anyone can come in and play. type one: from tier 1 to 60, type two: from tier 1 to 120(max).
people came in there with whatever ship they fancy/had, waited for the room to fill up (there was a minimum and maximum number of players for the battle to start, nothing more, no "vehicle" limitation).
the players had to arrange themselves in one or another team, no automatic process. it took anything from 3 to 15 minutes for a battle to start.

2 . because of the time it took to start a battle and because people with same type of vehicle started crowding in:  a hard cap for the most powerful vehicles appeared.
from that moment on you could have only 12 (I don't remember exactly) battle ships in one battle, 6 per side.
that meant that the powerful ships will spread in all the battles awaiting to start, stop them from crowding in only one.
that is exactly what the arty cap would mean in WoT.
and all seemed nice, right? wait to see what followed.

3 because the challenging top type of vessel (aircraft carrier, CV), a direct threat to BBs (battle ships), started to crowd in against capped numbers of BBs the BB players suffered so much they requested a CV numbers cap. 6 or 8 maximum, 3 or 4 / side.
and it resolved the problem for awhile.
the battles needed only around 10 minutes to start now.

4. because the CVs were no longer performing as anti-BB ship, being too few, their only role became to scout for the team (BBs). very boring. people stopped playing CVs.
CV numbers dropped. that's how a minimum cap for CVs appeared.
the dev thought that: you don't play CV every now and then, then u have no battles whatsoever. period. the CV was essential to gameplay.
many times players entering a room with a BB had to exit and return with a CV for the room to start.
battles needed again greater than 10 minutes to start because lack of CVs.

5 in desperate need of room start acceleration the team splitting became automatic.
players still gathered voluntarily, but the split in 2 teams became automatic.
battle start in less than 10 min again.

6 that did nothing to make CV more attractive, so numbers continued to drop.
battle starts again in more than 10 minutes of preparations and waiting.
many people were AFK at battle start because of it.

intermediate result: you have a hard cap (maximum and minimum) on CVs,  a hard cap on BBs (only maximum, but it was full of them all the time, being the only powerful and enjoyable vehicle).
all other vehicles started to get max caps, especially those threatening the BBs (torpedo boats and submarines). only logical: if the BBs are capped you can't have infinite threat to them.
so you started having a cap on all vehicles.

final result: all vehicle numbers were max caped, some were min caped = you get the exact same number of vehicles, form each type, every battle. and still it took over 10 min to start a battle, because lack of CVs.

it was horrifically boring.
all battles were exactly the same setup, only the player differed and still over 10 minutes to start. half the time "playing" was spent waiting to actually play.
again.
and again.
and again.
all exactly the same.
boring till beyond belief.
the game started dyeing. dooh.


what WG did in WoT, because of what they learned in NF (and possibly other places too):

1 automatic room making (the so called MM). no need for people to gather in one room, the MM does it automatically and fast. the team split too. it's all lightning speed, believe me, compared to NF. when u play WoT u actually play, not wait.

2 no caps whatsoever on vehicle numbers. because they knew that one cap = cap for all, because the game can't self regulate it's self.
they let the players to make the counter-measure for any predominant vehicle.
too much heavys? = arty and TD is played more.
too much arty? = scouts are played more.
too much TDs? mediums are played more
too much scouts? = medium and heavys again.

it's a self- healing mechanism!
and it's not boring!

every battle is a different story. alleluia for that.


result: some battles have a certain vehicle imbalance in numbers.
some have too many heavys (and I don't see u chaps complaining from that, how come?)
others have too many artys (oh, the whining, pff)

but it's a small price to pay (an imbalanced vehicle numbers battle every now and then) to get an enjoyable game.

the devs know that. they have been trough the whole process in NF and are smart enough not to repeat it.
the game would become very boring very fast if they indulge and cap arty numbers. and they will loose money.
not gonna happen, folks.

interesting? history was always boring....
sry for the way too long reading, I can only hope it clears a few ideas for you. thx for reading and thinking about it.
cheers

Edited by tadada, 03 November 2012 - 12:16 PM.


Aethelwulf309 #2 Posted 02 November 2012 - 01:59 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 14138 battles
  • 309
  • Member since:
    02-28-2012
/yawn

It's okay to simply not post in this thread if you're not interested.  In fact, the forum rules require that you post constructively or not at all.

---Orree

Edited by Orree, 02 November 2012 - 05:31 PM.


tadada #3 Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:05 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 11434 battles
  • 1,785
  • [FT-RO] FT-RO
  • Member since:
    07-20-2010

View PostAethelwulf309, on 02 November 2012 - 01:59 PM, said:

/yawn
I should have mentioned:
only before night sleep, together with a glass of milk (and a cookie).
:Smile_Default:
wtf am I saying, just keep it below 2 glasses of bourbon, ok?  :Smile_veryhappy:

Edited by tadada, 02 November 2012 - 02:09 PM.


arbenowskee #4 Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:09 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13950 battles
  • 2,950
  • [F15] F15
  • Member since:
    10-31-2011
Exactly. But people will not grasp this concept at all. They are killed by arty once and then they start whining like little bi***es and demanding arty cap. Go play that tank/class if you think it's OP.

jup331 #5 Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:14 PM

    Junior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23849 battles
  • 169
  • [RAFA] RAFA
  • Member since:
    07-03-2011
Thank you for those informations. I hope especially those MM-haters (why do they even play?) will read this^^

+1 from me ;)

Thomas_The_Tank_Engine #6 Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:15 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 15530 battles
  • 640
  • [OCUK] OCUK
  • Member since:
    05-22-2011
Yeah. People don't understand that there are too many people playing arty. At the moment it seems we've got 5 people playing high tier arty for every 10 people playing tanks. The numbers just aren't there to make teams with 13 tanks and 2 arty when too many people are playing high tiered arty compared to high tiered tanks.

If they put a hard cap on them, say 2 per side..... matchmaker would keep making a new game for every 4 arty guys that click "battle".

There would be loads of games waiting in the queue with their 4 artillery, but not enough tanks joining to fill any of them.

Edited by Thomas_The_Tank_Engine, 02 November 2012 - 02:17 PM.


jodgi #7 Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:24 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28248 battles
  • 831
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011
Good read, thanks!

I'd like to see the limit-arti posters come in here and discuss...

Rudy_B #8 Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:24 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 6498 battles
  • 31
  • [SOBAD] SOBAD
  • Member since:
    08-09-2011
Thank you and very insightfull!

arbenowskee #9 Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:32 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13950 battles
  • 2,950
  • [F15] F15
  • Member since:
    10-31-2011

View PostThomas_The_Tank_Engine, on 02 November 2012 - 02:15 PM, said:

Yeah. People don't understand that there are too many people playing arty. At the moment it seems we've got 5 people playing high tier arty for every 10 people playing tanks. The numbers just aren't there to make teams with 13 tanks and 2 arty when too many people are playing high tiered arty compared to high tiered tanks.

If they put a hard cap on them, say 2 per side..... matchmaker would keep making a new game for every 4 arty guys that click "battle".

There would be loads of games waiting in the queue with their 4 artillery, but not enough tanks joining to fill any of them.

No, it doesn't happen every game. Besides, there is too much arty because fast tanks are not preferred enough. So start playing that T-50-2 and scout :D

Gloomi1979 #10 Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:37 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 11486 battles
  • 7
  • [FROG3] FROG3
  • Member since:
    07-29-2011
Yep very interesting thanks.

I played NF for a couple of weeks last year and as a Tier I frigat I spent more time in the game creation room than playing, I was destroyed after 2 min most of the time.

WoT's MM is not perfect but given the number of players, the number of Tiers and the number of different classes of tanks, it works pretty well and is able to create a game in less than 5 seconds most of the time.

tadada #11 Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:42 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 11434 battles
  • 1,785
  • [FT-RO] FT-RO
  • Member since:
    07-20-2010

View PostGloomi1979, on 02 November 2012 - 02:37 PM, said:

Yep very interesting thanks.

I played NF for a couple of weeks last year and as a Tier I frigat I spent more time in the game creation room than playing, I was destroyed after 2 min most of the time.

WoT's MM is not perfect but given the number of players, the number of Tiers and the number of different classes of tanks, it works pretty well and is able to create a game in less than 5 seconds most of the time.

the instant WoT appeared it aspirated maybe 90% of the NF player base.
the fast and various MM was the most refreshing thing ever. it was the holly grail after waiting more than playing, in NF, and after playing the exact same battle tens of thousands times!

not going back to that :) believe me, and I'm glad you know about it.

Edited by tadada, 02 November 2012 - 02:43 PM.


Thomas_The_Tank_Engine #12 Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:49 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 15530 battles
  • 640
  • [OCUK] OCUK
  • Member since:
    05-22-2011

View Postarbenowskee, on 02 November 2012 - 02:32 PM, said:

No, it doesn't happen every game. Besides, there is too much arty because fast tanks are not preferred enough. So start playing that T-50-2 and scout :D

No it's not every game, but it's happens enough to see there are too many people picking high tiered arty compared to high tiered tanks to fill the games with the tank/arty ratio people want. Even arty players want less arty in their game. It's much more fun to play in a team that has 13 tanks which can protect you, and 13 enemy tanks to shoot at.

WG acknowledge it's a problem, which is why they're trying to discourage players from playing them so much with the credit nerf.

Sure more scouts would help, as well as more people playing their tier 10's. Imo the tier 10's and tier 5 scouts need a credit boost to encourage people to play them more often.

tango_delta #13 Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:54 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 11458 battles
  • 2,122
  • Member since:
    03-17-2011
Playing scouts is not a direct counter to arty because scouts get wider matchmaking than arties. Adding one high tier scout to the system to counter one high tier arty does not work because there is only roughly 2/6 of chance of the two ending in the same battle. A tier 5 light tank has matchmaking range from tier 7 to 12 (6). A t7 arty for example has mm range from 10 to 11 (2). This means that the actual chance for both getting the same match is about 2/6. Or 1/3.

It is also questionable whether we need so much arty in the game. Limiting arty does not make the delays or queueing times any longer for non-arty players either. It is simply stupid to say that limiting arty would add delay for everybody. It is simply not true. It would increase the delay and queue time for the arty players but that's what you deserve for playing too popular tank. And it is beyond a fact that having the servers filled with arty has a drastic negative effect for the game while having the servers filled with any other type of vehicle will not create any problems at all.

OP has also very bizarre idea about how people play wot. We do not change our tanks based on what the battlefield looks like. Some of us like playing heavies, some like scouts. Others prefer mediums and some like arty. Some have target tanks we eventually want to get and so we are grinding through some other tanks. We are grinding through good tanks and bad tanks. And some tanks are good because of mm, some are good because they are fun and others are not fun because of arty for example. You do not just stop grinding a tank if you don't like arty shooting at it. And even if you do you do nto switch to any arty counter tanks. It just doesn't happen because the face of battlefield is never a factor for us when we are choosing tanks for randoms. We don't stop playing our doubles just for arty for example.

Very few are willing to change their tank just to adapt to the situation. I don't want to switch from my tanks to other type of tanks just because there is so much arty. And I'm quite sure others do it as well.. You do not change your tanks. You just stop playing them. Instead of the system being self healing it is self killing. Arty numbers increase -> reaction -> people play heavies less -> result -> arty becomes even more problematic because people who stopped playing heavies switch to arty counter tanks but simply go elsewhere.

People play tanks they are grinding through anyways. There is no such thing as switching from one tank to another type of tank based on some tank type being too popular and people thinking about countering it. That is nothing more than some strange invention from the OP to make his own ideas sound legit for himself. That may happen in some other games but not win wot for the simple reason we can not even do it ourselves just because mm works on random ways. You never know the map or the other tanks when pressing battle. Instead of countering something you may be facing a perfect counter to you.

Arty problem will not heal itself. Something needs to be done to it. Closing your eyes and hoping people stop playing arty is just lazy. And makes wot less fun and more boring.

Edited by tango_delta, 03 November 2012 - 11:43 AM.


zmeul #14 Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:56 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 19542 battles
  • 2,859
  • Member since:
    07-10-2010

View Posttadada, on 02 November 2012 - 01:54 PM, said:

ok, great read
although I never played NF as I would like, tried it and kinda didn't stick, waiting for NF2

bit of differences tho, after what I read
as it looks like NF has a limit for units to start a game, WoT doesn't; WoT's MM can start a game with without scouts and/or SPGs and they aren't mutually exclusive either
you see matches without SPGs and you see matches where mediums have to scout
does the game feels lacking because of no SPG matches or because there are no scouts? nop
will scouts and SPG die? nop, because of the CW - SPGs and scouts are still needed in CW, in various numbers

WoT's MM doesn't need a min cap for SPGs or scouts, it needs a max cap for SPGs

as someone above said, the killer of arty is still arty and the killer of scouts are still the scouts
SPGs stand above all, they do not work in the rock/paper/scissors mechanic of a match, they're the shotgun that kills all

Posted ImagePosted Image


replaced NV for NF, I didn't noticed :)

Edited by zmeul, 02 November 2012 - 03:24 PM.


tadada #15 Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:22 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 11434 battles
  • 1,785
  • [FT-RO] FT-RO
  • Member since:
    07-20-2010

View Postzmeul, on 02 November 2012 - 02:56 PM, said:

ok, great read
although I never played NV as I would like, tried it and kinda didn't stick, waiting for NV2

bit of differences tho, after what I read
as it looks like NV has a limit for units to start a game, WoT doesn't; WoT's MM can start a game with without scouts and/or SPGs and they aren't mutually exclusive either
you see matches without SPGs and you see matches where mediums have to scout
does the game feels lacking because of no SPG matches or because there are no scouts? nop
will scouts and SPG die? nop, because of the CW - SPGs and scouts are still needed in CW, in various numbers

WoT's MM doesn't need a min cap for SPGs or scouts, it needs a max cap for SPGs

NF (navy field) not NV. and yes, I'm curious about NF2 too, only open beta in japan till now.:)

what NF demonstrated in the CV (carrier) - BB (battle ship) relation is that you need a critical minimum number of each to pose a real threat to the "nemesis".
if CV were max caped they just eliminate each other and scout for the BBs, which let all the battle winning for other players (BBs) to do.
excruciatingly frustrating and boring.

therefore, if the CVs were max caped below that critical number the vehicle died automatically altogether, for good.
without critical mass the CVs become not less, but almost non-existent.

when that happened the whole "ecosystem" of vehicles was unbalanced, making the BB the only valid option to play.
then they all played only that.
diversity lost = boring.

now, you could say: ok, then cap arty with a big number, let's say 4, or 10 (2 or 5 per side) and see how that goes.
because of 2 reasons,
no.

1. mindless whiners will continue to whine, just as before, till the cap drops below the situation when arty poses a threat to heavys.
I can bet on that a large sum of money, and sign.
eventually the devs might crack ( they did it before when deciding to cap in the first place) and there you go, WoT = heavy tanks alley, nothing more.
(it's called "foot in the door" manipulation technique)

2.  I don't mind extreme variation if the opposing option is no variation at all, aka monotony.
NF, chess and many others have a monotonous start.
not a big incentive to play. because all battles will start and play for a big whille in a very rigid way.

in chess the solution is called chess 360.

in NF there was no solution, and all battles happened exactly the same: each team has 2 flanks, each with same number of BBs and 2 CVs, each flank doing the same movement (forward 3 seconds then up/down).
any other battle movement = fail.
heh. do you believe me it was boring?  :Smile_veryhappy:
doing that for 10k battles +?
that was the second reason: variation trough start premises variation.

Edited by tadada, 02 November 2012 - 03:23 PM.


zmeul #16 Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:28 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 19542 battles
  • 2,859
  • Member since:
    07-10-2010

View Posttadada, on 02 November 2012 - 03:22 PM, said:

but, because of the recent MM spread set to 2 everyone can kill everyone indifferent on what they play
variety still exists

I wanted to say something more but I forgot, I'm watching a  movie  :Smile_popcorn1:

DasNiveau #17 Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:31 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 10064 battles
  • 2,496
  • [WEMA] WEMA
  • Member since:
    11-09-2011

View Postzmeul, on 02 November 2012 - 02:56 PM, said:


SPGs stand above all, they do not work in the rock/paper/scissors mechanic of a match, they're the shotgun that kills all

Posted Image


replaced NV for NF, I didn't noticed :)

Id like to agree with you, but then again SPGs are not so shootguny after all.

But what i learned from that history ... making teams EXACTLY balanced could result of a long wait ... the rarer a tank the longer the wait.
So we do have to life with "unbalaned" teams.

But a "If Arty >3 leave room and join next room" condition is nether imposible nor game cruching. It could result in longer waiting times for high tier artys. But at the speed the MM is sortet it should not last for 10+ Minutes ...

zmeul #18 Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:33 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 19542 battles
  • 2,859
  • Member since:
    07-10-2010

View PostDasNiveau, on 02 November 2012 - 03:31 PM, said:

But what i learned from that history ... making teams EXACTLY balanced could result of a long wait ... the rarer a tank the longer the wait.
the cue word is "maybe"
but WG didn't even tried as far as we know, not on the SuperTest nor the public one

tadada #19 Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:33 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 11434 battles
  • 1,785
  • [FT-RO] FT-RO
  • Member since:
    07-20-2010

View Postzmeul, on 02 November 2012 - 03:28 PM, said:

but, because of the recent MM spread set to 2 everyone can kill everyone indifferent on what they play
variety still exists

I wanted to say something more but I forgot, I'm watching a  movie  :Smile_popcorn1:

wasn't 3? it's 2 now? :)2 beyond your own tier, ok I get it

yeah. but if that transforms into "any heavy can kill any other heavy" it's a lil bit less than "any vehicle can kill any other vehicle", don't you agree?  :Smile_veryhappy:

what movie?

zmeul #20 Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:41 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 19542 battles
  • 2,859
  • Member since:
    07-10-2010

View Posttadada, on 02 November 2012 - 03:33 PM, said:

but if that transforms into "any heavy can kill any other heavy
hmm nop, not really
meds can flank and kill heavys, scouts can flank and put some shells into heavy's arse, well perhaps with the exception of the MAUS - but can be done
and now, with gold ammo flying around like pinata candy, doesn't even qualifies as an issue anymore


movie, yeah .. not really a movie, it's the 1st season of Person of Interest - quite nice TV series and unexpected




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users