Jump to content


Competition is good so Armored Warfare is coming


  • Please log in to reply
58 replies to this topic

Poll: MM skills importance (177 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 250 battles in order to participate this poll.

Do we need MatchMaker based on players rating/skills?

  1. YES (54 votes [30.51%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 30.51%

  2. NO (123 votes [69.49%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 69.49%

Vote Hide poll

Procjon #1 Posted 10 July 2015 - 03:19 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 53467 battles
  • 412
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

I get tired of MM doing matches resulting in 15:0, or 14 tanks T3 vs 3 tanks T3, or 10 tanks T10 vs 5 tanks T10 + the rest arty, or most of meds vs heavies and etc.

 

I understand random term but really? you can not even do proper programming based on type + tier of tanks?

 

I read many topics similar to mine but i'd like to add a little bit hope as we all know, except WG, what should be done long long ago. So here we are, ARMORED WARFARE is coming - testing phase now - and what i see they listen to players especially to those that pay REAL MONEY. 

 

Finally AW will have not only type + tier MM but also tanks modifications + SKILLS RATING. Yes, you heard it right, finally MM based on skills.  I guess it is not difficult for everybody to create a system that will please its customers.

 

I will look forward what WG is going to do to minimize a loss of many players due to a lack of upgrading of the game for years in this important matter.

 

hf



Balc0ra #2 Posted 10 July 2015 - 03:49 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 63736 battles
  • 14,996
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

Don't matter when PVP is at boring as little well done as it is there tbh, they still have much to learn on that aspect. So I doubt WG will care. That and how their game is running atm. I don't think many will leave wot for AW. As the last few AW patches broke the game for low spec systems. And if you have seen the average system of a WOT player. Most of em will stay anyway as they can't play AW. WG knows as much. Though that said. I'm having rater good fun with the PVE to name one thing. In fact PVE is the only thing that is really well done tbh. And it's easier to get XP that way. And the overmatch warning system when shooting is neat to. I wish they had that in wot to make it easier for new players to understand.

 

And like WG did in the early stages of WOT. AW will listen to their players. Why?  Because the game is still in the development stage. It's still draining money and still costing en more then they make. Once that turns around, they will slowly start to ignore their players to as the game is fine as is etc. I dare you to name one company that has made a massive MMO or MP that does that constantly or as good as they did during beta. 2 years form now, AW will be the same. Trust me.

 

But the thing is that most inc you think that they will win more and do better with skilled based MM. That when you fight people with equal skills, some one has to lose more then the rest. And as we have seen in WOT. There is skill to fight, street smart and map awareness. As we have seen to many times. Most usually have just the one. So don't think you will see less campers or "lemmings" there either. Since they are equally as much there as in WOT. I dare say they have more.

 

But you have hopes at least. Gotta respect that.



Procjon #3 Posted 10 July 2015 - 04:10 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 53467 battles
  • 412
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

@Balc0ra

 

I understand that over the time any game stops in development but from the game which is not tetris style i require a bit more than basic MM that is not working properly anyway. Especially when many of us can have 10 beautiful games and suddenly that rain of another 10games like 15:0 or a game i just had 1 T10 med + 1 T10 arty vs 5 T10 + 1 T10 arty. If a developer wants to make something simple, that's fine with me, but please make sure that simple thing works as it should.

 

I play games mostly to enjoy them (serious times are gone as i get older and don't care much about being at top at all cost) and i like to play games i'm one of the main factors. In games i mentioned above you have minimal influence when it comes to the result of the battle and even less pleasure from playing it.

 

My point is as i hear many complaints about MM that people want something better and if WG is not going to change it then people will move on - and the next target on the horizon is AW.

 

I have a hope because i invested a lot of time in WOT but if i can find something better i will not look behind, that is for sure.

 

 

 



Balc0ra #4 Posted 10 July 2015 - 04:30 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 63736 battles
  • 14,996
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostProcjon, on 10 July 2015 - 03:10 AM, said:

 

I play games mostly to enjoy them (serious times are gone as i get older and don't care much about being at top at all cost) and i like to play games i'm one of the main factors. In games i mentioned above you have minimal influence when it comes to the result of the battle and even less pleasure from playing it.

 

 

I'm getting closer to 40. I'm not getting younger either. But the thing is that if you can't find the fun in anything. Then why play? If you can't find a tank that is fun and take it out for a few rounds and take a break form the grinds, regardless if you win or lose. I have a few tanks like that. Tanks I don't care about, that I use when I want to find the fun again and I don't care about the out come. You kinda said you get older and don't care about getting on the top.. Then why cry about MM at all? Or are you one of those that care or get upset if their WR drop 0.01% overall. If enjoyment is above all as you said. Why is MM so important to you? And yes. Even in WOT, even as a low tier scout. You have the influence. They camp? Then make sure you spot em before they spot your campers. They yolo, then you better support em. Can't sit in base crying about it. I've won enough 20% win chance games to know that.

 

View PostProcjon, on 10 July 2015 - 03:10 AM, said:

 

My point is as i hear many complaints about MM that people want something better and if WG is not going to change it then people will move on - and the next target on the horizon is AW.

 

I have a hope because i invested a lot of time in WOT but if i can find something better i will not look behind, that is for sure.

 

 

Most will move on aye. As most do with games over time. But WG gains 2 for each they lose. And the numbers at peak hours have gone up with 60K the past year or so on EU. And gone up a few 100K on RU. See most want a skilled based MM,. and expect WG to implement it in a week. WG have said time and time again, they won't do it to alianate some players. That kind of MM would make groups. And some would be smaller then the rest. And if once had to be tossed up due to lack of players. We all know what would happen. The typical rage that they got the "tomato" in their team and no the other and so forth. It would just split the game more IMO if not done right. And that's just it. If they did do it. It would take time to implement it. As most things with this game is. Even small things have taken a year maybe.

 

But I still remain here. Why? Do I care about the MM. Nope I don't. I do grind my high tier tanks. And if that don't work. Then we do some crew training on the mid tiers. Or play some other tanks that are fun for a bit. If you can't mix it up and find your "fun" zone at times. Then this ain't the game for you after a bit. It's the main reason why so many leave, as with all games. It's not the MM. It's that they don't do an effort to variate and find the fun. Most just "grinds" and then it don't work.

 

 

But as for AW again. I found PVE fun. And will play it. But overall AW is not for me yet on the PVP part. Even with the "MM". And if I can't find the fun there as you do here. Then sadly that game is not for me either as of now.

Procjon #5 Posted 10 July 2015 - 04:57 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 53467 battles
  • 412
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

@Balc0ra

 

I care about MM because i don't like to lose extra of my limited time, i get older and i play to have some fun but it does not mean i need change my goal and try to find a fun in different department only because a developer does not want to listen to its customers.

 

I'm a business owner and based on my experience the moment you stop to please your customers you are out of business. So let's see if WG will come out with something or will let the other to hold the crown.

 



Enforcer1975 #6 Posted 10 July 2015 - 07:18 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 19736 battles
  • 10,251
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014
Where is the competition when you have different products? No big car company went out of business yet and as they all claim to make the better car...A lot of people can use multiple products at the same time.

jabster #7 Posted 10 July 2015 - 07:42 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12526 battles
  • 22,458
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostEnforcer1975, on 10 July 2015 - 06:18 AM, said:

Where is the competition when you have different products? No big car company went out of business yet and as they all claim to make the better car...A lot of people can use multiple products at the same time.

 

The British car industry will disagree with you :)

CumbDlickers #8 Posted 10 July 2015 - 07:44 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 31175 battles
  • 1,286
  • Member since:
    05-28-2012

The weaker the players (not only enemies but your allies as well) the more you can shine. 

There is a legit reason, why most stronk players dislike 3 men plutonus, while some of them feel even 2 are already to much and pref. to play solo. 

 

I have nothing against introducing some kind of ELO system and add ranked games on top of normals, something like you you have in LOL for example, but if it would be the case, some of us would have to wait 2-4 hours to get into a game to be matched with/vs equally ranked players, like in LOL, the stronger you get, the longer you wait (and LOL's player base is A LOT bigger than WOT's).



bprelec #9 Posted 10 July 2015 - 08:37 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 34519 battles
  • 229
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

AW is to WOT what M4A3E8 is to Fury

 

And skill based MM only works in 1vs1 games



TankkiPoju #10 Posted 10 July 2015 - 08:49 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 20014 battles
  • 6,192
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011

View Postbprelec, on 10 July 2015 - 08:37 AM, said:

And skill based MM only works in 1vs1 games

 

There are plenty of multiplayer games that use skill based matchmaking for ranked battles, and they seem to do just fine... such as Counter-Strike and various MOBAs.

 

Maybe WoT could also just do something similar like have ordinary casual battles and then separate ranked battles which use individual skill to balance games.



Slyspy #11 Posted 10 July 2015 - 08:52 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14186 battles
  • 16,477
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostTankkiPoju, on 10 July 2015 - 08:49 AM, said:

 

 

Maybe WoT could also just do something similar like have ordinary casual battles and then separate ranked battles which use individual skill to balance games.

 

Splitting the player base is an unlikely move on WG's part IMO. The concept of the instant random battle is central to the game design.



_b_ #12 Posted 10 July 2015 - 08:54 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 54446 battles
  • 3,901
  • Member since:
    04-06-2011

Even a rough calculation so that teams are not the all pruple/blue/green on one team .. other team mainly more red'ish ... should be possible without causing to long queues?

 

Implement xvm with wn or winrate or wg's own system .. what ever .. just some balancing?

 

Those rolfstomp matches where all are dead in less than 4 minutes are not much for for either team .. no matter what kind of good scores you get if you went the right flank ...



signal11th #13 Posted 10 July 2015 - 09:22 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 34971 battles
  • 5,430
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    07-14-2011

Unfortunately the most people who seem to want skill based MM are usually bad players and unfortunately these guys are bad for a reason. I mean I class myself as semi-good but lately the MM has been screwing me but I'm still doing well. It's called hard work and learning that's all you need to do. You want to get good at anything at life even something as silly as a computer game you have to work at it even if WG are trying to give you the shaft.

 

If you want one tip from me , play a tank that you are good at and get good stats with that for the "session" and then play the tank you're not good in and get the x2 (or whatever  it is)and carry on with the good tank. If you continually play tanks that are crap and or you don't do very well in your stats take a hammering.


 

 

My only wish for a MM change would be for WG to stop classing a Leopard PTA the same weight as a E75


Edited by signal11th, 10 July 2015 - 09:30 AM.


tinco91 #14 Posted 10 July 2015 - 09:37 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 25981 battles
  • 41
  • Member since:
    12-02-2011

Am I the only one that doesn't have problem with MM? Yes, sometimes I get 20% games but as well sometimes I get 80% games (by XVM). So how come that I don't care about it? Maybe because I won so many of those 20% games that I don't consider them as instant loss? Try that! 

 

All you guys say that you play for fun but all I can hear how you whine  about  a game you lost  because enemy team had unicums on their team and you had tomato players. Well why don't you guys become unicums and your team will always have at least one unicum in your team, every game. Simple as that.

 

I play this game for fun, and by that I mean that having fun is playing this game properly and being good in it. But that is just me!



lord_chipmonk #15 Posted 10 July 2015 - 10:00 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 32593 battles
  • 10,166
  • [-HOW-] -HOW-
  • Member since:
    12-23-2012
So, I've played AW in the closed beta test, with its SBMM. It's a good game. Is it free from roflstomp results? Not in a month of Sundays. In fact, there are many people who say they think they happen more in AW than WoT. I don't have any data, so I won't comment. Point is that skill-based matchmaking is not the answer to your problems OP. Sorry. 

CroustibatFR #16 Posted 10 July 2015 - 11:31 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 23297 battles
  • 4,135
  • Member since:
    09-14-2011

View Post_b_, on 10 July 2015 - 08:54 AM, said:

Those rolfstomp matches where all are dead in less than 4 minutes are not much for for either team .. no matter what kind of good scores you get if you went the right flank ...

 

They don't happen that often;

and i'd rather have a match over in less than 4 minutes from time to time than wait 20 minutes before each match.



cu_chulainn_ #17 Posted 10 July 2015 - 11:58 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 40393 battles
  • 1,009
  • Member since:
    02-26-2014
I like the mm, I would be very against a skill based mm, the current system offers the best chance to improve if you so wish, the biggest obstacle to that is ourselves.i won't learn from playing against other poor players I'll learn from fighting against better opponents,a skill based mm would deprive me off that it also deprives me of them occasions where i take out someone who is statisticly better than me

Procjon #18 Posted 11 August 2015 - 04:57 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 53467 battles
  • 412
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

Hello again,

 

I see a lot of people are against skill based MM. I was surprised at the beginning but after reading comments of some of the opponents i see why they might be against. 

 

I think there is a bit confusion what skill based MM means for me. I'm against playing vs same skill lvl opponents as most of us know that we can learn and improve going vs better players than we are.

 

That's why skill based MM should be divided in groups, the range is up to discussion, but i believe such a MM would eliminate those games when you get players with +10k of games and still acting like this game is about driving cluelessly and doing opposite things to what particular type of the battle stands for. Small example from yesterday. Heavy tank camping in our base the whole game, after 3 players left on each team he/she/it moves into enemy base and starts capping ---> +15k of games and don't ask me about personal score....:facepalm:.

 

I understand everybody is a "newbie" - in any game - but being a "noob" is completely different department. I'm for helping newbies to understand any game as more players with skills means more fun we have but i think nobody likes to waste our time for "noobs".

 

Regards

 

 

 



Evil_Mungo #19 Posted 11 August 2015 - 05:08 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Clan Commander
  • 28225 battles
  • 3,332
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    06-12-2012

I don't want to play against players in a bracket.  

 

I like the challenge of playing against unicums and taking the game seriously but I also like to get drunk and charge about with clanmates, jumping off cliffs onto people.  Random  games gives everyone the same chance to play with or against everyone else and is the fairest way to match people against each other.  I don't mind the idea of having the option of playing ranked games other than the fact that we already have multiple gamemodes that allow that to happen.



Mr_Sukebe #20 Posted 11 August 2015 - 06:50 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 32283 battles
  • 2,623
  • [ZOLO] ZOLO
  • Member since:
    06-04-2011

The AW implementation of MM is a shite idea.

Anything that obliges "good" players to carry "bad" is just a recipe for annoying the better players.  AW will NEVER see my credit card, as long as it uses that type of MM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users