Jump to content


Ranked Battles bad rigged matchmaking


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

DeathAdd3r #1 Posted 06 June 2017 - 09:24 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 39638 battles
  • 37
  • [LGEND] LGEND
  • Member since:
    03-11-2013

so i experience this auto - loss game 4 heavy vs 11 heavy.. difference in hp was 10.000+

 

http://imgur.com/a/lgxnj

 

Why is this allowed ?!



ZlatanArKung #2 Posted 06 June 2017 - 09:39 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
Because WG thinks those games are fun.

JuliusCheddar #3 Posted 06 June 2017 - 09:41 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 28697 battles
  • 564
  • [3BPAN] 3BPAN
  • Member since:
    08-27-2014
Word "rigged" generates so much cringe 

SenpaiErick #4 Posted 06 June 2017 - 09:50 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Clan Commander
  • 46279 battles
  • 522
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    06-08-2011
Heavies vs mediums on an open map? "Rigged"

250swb #5 Posted 06 June 2017 - 09:50 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 22122 battles
  • 4,968
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-23-2015

View PostDeathAdd3r, on 06 June 2017 - 09:24 AM, said:

so i experience this auto - loss game 4 heavy vs 11 heavy.. difference in hp was 10.000+

 

http://imgur.com/a/lgxnj

 

Why is this allowed ?!

 

 

Why is it allowed? I think you'd have to say somebody at WG designed it that way, they put a lot of thought into it and that was the outcome. I mean, they are paid a lot to do stuff like that, it's their job, so it must be right, mustn't it?



Hedgehog1963 #6 Posted 06 June 2017 - 09:55 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 51189 battles
  • 7,430
  • [DIRTY] DIRTY
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011
See the other thread.  MTs are more versatile and more of them is good on suitable maps.

Ulicum #7 Posted 06 June 2017 - 10:03 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 39597 battles
  • 1,961
  • [3VS27] 3VS27
  • Member since:
    07-09-2011

I wonder what has OP done to make WG rig this game mode against him. Would not wanna be in his team.

 



hson_hson #8 Posted 06 June 2017 - 10:31 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 6487 battles
  • 154
  • Member since:
    08-19-2014

View PostDeathAdd3r, on 06 June 2017 - 09:24 AM, said:

so i experience this auto - loss game 4 heavy vs 11 heavy.. difference in hp was 10.000+

 

Difference was 7700...



Aikl #9 Posted 06 June 2017 - 10:39 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25275 battles
  • 4,349
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

Matchmaker doesn't really care about tank classes, which is part of the rather 'random' nature of WoT - it makes it possible to get wins once in a while even if you don't really deserve it. Maybe the MM should be adjusted for ranked battles, but on the other hand it can serve as basis for more interesting tactics.

 

Oh, and Redshire isn't impossible to win with a heavy tank disadvantage - that is if the team recognises that they can't expect to win the heavy tank lane with half the number of tanks. I guess that "requirement" alone makes the unbalanced matchup a problem in itself...


Edited by Aikl, 06 June 2017 - 11:12 AM.


juonimies #10 Posted 06 June 2017 - 11:05 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 43886 battles
  • 358
  • [KARJU] KARJU
  • Member since:
    07-04-2011

View Posthson_hson, on 06 June 2017 - 09:31 AM, said:

 

Difference was 7700...

 

Still enough to predict the battle result before battle start.

Snatch_The_AmmoRacks #11 Posted 10 June 2017 - 11:19 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28951 battles
  • 274
  • [ORIGN] ORIGN
  • Member since:
    11-10-2013

View PostAikl, on 06 June 2017 - 09:39 AM, said:

Matchmaker doesn't really care about tank classes, which is part of the rather 'random' nature of WoT - it makes it possible to get wins once in a while even if you don't really deserve it. Maybe the MM should be adjusted for ranked battles, but on the other hand it can serve as basis for more interesting tactics.

 

Oh, and Redshire isn't impossible to win with a heavy tank disadvantage - that is if the team recognises that they can't expect to win the heavy tank lane with half the number of tanks. I guess that "requirement" alone makes the unbalanced matchup a problem in itself...

 

Accept it does care (when it isn't rigging you). Otherwise WG would not have stated that in 9.19 the 2 minute 0-15 wash games will be less likely as teams will have equal amounts of tank types and tiers.

And ranked battles have a funny feeling to it. I was making good steady progress and got to 165th on the leaderboard in division 1.  I suddenly then had a 2 day in a row loosing streak and have only increased my rank points by 1. 1!!! F**king rank point (I know I play crapto. Don't need to point out mistakes I acknowledge).  If this is because its rigged or simply more of the brain dead monkeys caught up in the ranks and made ranked battles feel like randoms once again, I don't know. Either way Im dropping like the British clown I am on the leader boards now and will lose my damn mind if i drop to division 2.



brumbarr #12 Posted 10 June 2017 - 11:28 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

I always found it weird that people find an HP difference unbalanced.  I dont get that. Every tank is balanced with its amount of HP in mind, heavy tanks have higher HP for a reason, because they have lower dpm and are slower. Meds have higher dpm and less HP.   The total amount of HP is irrelevant since the HP is balanced out by the rest of balancing factors on both teams. The team with more meds has more dpm and can chew trough that HP faster than the enemy could.

 

Imagine the same setup but every tank has its HP lowered to make the total HP equal. Now that battle would be completely unbalanced. Total HP is irrelevant as every tank is balanced keepign its HP in mind. A 907 has less HP than an E100, but that doesnt mean the E100 has the advantage. 5 907s vs 5 E100s and you have a 3.5K hp difference. But that doesnt mean the 907 are at a disadvantage, they are prob even at an advantage. Total HP should NOT be looked at when determining if a lineup is balanced.



Aikl #13 Posted 11 June 2017 - 08:54 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25275 battles
  • 4,349
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostJuicyProduction, on 10 June 2017 - 10:19 PM, said:

Accept it does care (when it isn't rigging you). Otherwise WG would not have stated that in 9.19 the 2 minute 0-15 wash games will be less likely as teams will have equal amounts of tank types and tiers.

 

And ranked battles have a funny feeling to it. I was making good steady progress and got to 165th on the leaderboard in division 1.  I suddenly then had a 2 day in a row loosing streak and have only increased my rank points by 1. 1!!! F**king rank point (I know I play crapto. Don't need to point out mistakes I acknowledge).

 

 If this is because its rigged or simply more of the brain dead monkeys caught up in the ranks and made ranked battles feel like randoms once again, I don't know. Either way Im dropping like the British clown I am on the leader boards now and will lose my damn mind if i drop to division 2.

 

Exactly where does it state that teams will have equal amounts of tank types and tiers? I seriously can't find it. 9.19 refers to tightening requirements for LTs, arty and platoons. 9.18 also claims that MM "considers" the amount of these vehicle types.

The third 9.18 micropatch claimed that:

Spoiler

 

Nowhere does it mention single-tier battles (which I guess includes ranked battles) or two-tier battles. Confirms what I'm seeing in the game - it does have some balancing parameters, but those do not really care about tank classes outside the top three in 3/5/7 - and even that tends to be ignored if need be.

 

Ranked battles are inherently more random than skill-based, even if the bottom three in the winning team doesn't get a chevron. Your (and most others) contribution to the team is rather minor. Can't force a win on your own. Losing streaks makes 'statistical sense', even if you believe it's rigged. I really doubt Wargaming has anything to gain from limiting my RNG. Sure feels that way sometimes, though.

 

Oh, and like most new game modes it's destined to be derpy for the first couple of weeks. Guess a lot of people bought their first T10 tank and has little experience in it, or is grinding the top gun on E100/Patton/Batchat (guilty).



ZlatanArKung #14 Posted 11 June 2017 - 09:14 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View Postbrumbarr, on 10 June 2017 - 11:28 PM, said:

I always found it weird that people find an HP difference unbalanced.  I dont get that. Every tank is balanced with its amount of HP in mind, heavy tanks have higher HP for a reason, because they have lower dpm and are slower. Meds have higher dpm and less HP.   The total amount of HP is irrelevant since the HP is balanced out by the rest of balancing factors on both teams. The team with more meds has more dpm and can chew trough that HP faster than the enemy could.

 

Imagine the same setup but every tank has its HP lowered to make the total HP equal. Now that battle would be completely unbalanced. Total HP is irrelevant as every tank is balanced keepign its HP in mind. A 907 has less HP than an E100, but that doesnt mean the E100 has the advantage. 5 907s vs 5 E100s and you have a 3.5K hp difference. But that doesnt mean the 907 are at a disadvantage, they are prob even at an advantage. Total HP should NOT be looked at when determining if a lineup is balanced.

 

But then we have the Maus.

Top good dpm and top notch hp and top notch armour.

2450 dpm to the ~2700 of T10 meds (without equipments etc).



brumbarr #15 Posted 11 June 2017 - 09:17 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

View PostZlatanArKung, on 11 June 2017 - 09:14 AM, said:

 

But then we have the Maus.

Top good dpm and top notch hp and top notch armour.

2450 dpm to the ~2700 of T10 meds (without equipments etc).

Well maus is an OP tank, still doesnt mean total HP is a viable parameter to decide tank imbalance on teams.



ZlatanArKung #16 Posted 11 June 2017 - 09:26 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View Postbrumbarr, on 11 June 2017 - 09:17 AM, said:

Well maus is an OP tank, still doesnt mean total HP is a viable parameter to decide tank imbalance on teams.

No. Not that useful.

But on certain maps (corridors like Paris) more hp = more heavies = better setup for that particular map. Because heavies tend to have higher alpha and be able to bounce shells once in a while.

While other maps (Prokhorovka etc) favour the mobility and camo of mediums.

 

Just look at Tog on T6.



brumbarr #17 Posted 11 June 2017 - 09:32 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

View PostZlatanArKung, on 11 June 2017 - 09:26 AM, said:

No. Not that useful.

But on certain maps (corridors like Paris) more hp = more heavies = better setup for that particular map. Because heavies tend to have higher alpha and be able to bounce shells once in a while.

While other maps (Prokhorovka etc) favour the mobility and camo of mediums.

 

Just look at Tog on T6.

 

yes, but the HP itself isnt what unbalances the match. Its the tanks and types. The HP does not imply unbalance, but if their is unbalance, sometimes there is an HP difference.

Spurtung #18 Posted 11 June 2017 - 10:20 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 62771 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View PostDeathAdd3r, on 06 June 2017 - 10:24 AM, said:

so i experience this auto - loss game 4 heavy vs 11 heavy.. difference in hp was 10.000+

 

http://imgur.com/a/lgxnj

 

Why is this allowed ?!

 

What should be a farmfest of fat piñatas was probably blown up by your team playing like a random. Did your HTs go "where they should go"?

RamRaid90 #19 Posted 11 June 2017 - 10:52 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 21153 battles
  • 6,349
  • [D0NG] D0NG
  • Member since:
    12-14-2014

Explain how in any way this is rigged.

 

This is the very nature of random when random does not care for tank type when choosing heavies or mediums.

 

By the way, if you saw that and thought "auto loss" judging by the map you had, with the amount of good useable open cover and ridgelines on redshire which the meds could thrive on the pummel the slow lumbering heavy tanks then I really don't see how anyone can help you...



Snatch_The_AmmoRacks #20 Posted 12 June 2017 - 12:08 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28951 battles
  • 274
  • [ORIGN] ORIGN
  • Member since:
    11-10-2013

View PostAikl, on 11 June 2017 - 07:54 AM, said:

 

Exactly where does it state that teams will have equal amounts of tank types and tiers? I seriously can't find it. 9.19 refers to tightening requirements for LTs, arty and platoons. 9.18 also claims that MM "considers" the amount of these vehicle types.

The third 9.18 micropatch claimed that:

Spoiler

 

Nowhere does it mention single-tier battles (which I guess includes ranked battles) or two-tier battles. Confirms what I'm seeing in the game - it does have some balancing parameters, but those do not really care about tank classes outside the top three in 3/5/7 - and even that tends to be ignored if need be.

 

Ranked battles are inherently more random than skill-based, even if the bottom three in the winning team doesn't get a chevron. Your (and most others) contribution to the team is rather minor. Can't force a win on your own. Losing streaks makes 'statistical sense', even if you believe it's rigged. I really doubt Wargaming has anything to gain from limiting my RNG. Sure feels that way sometimes, though.

 

Oh, and like most new game modes it's destined to be derpy for the first couple of weeks. Guess a lot of people bought their first T10 tank and has little experience in it, or is grinding the top gun on E100/Patton/Batchat (guilty).

 

I did mix some stuff up but here:

https://www.youtube....h?v=x4ru1ioUZYg 0:30 "teams should be equal in class and tier of vehicles" 

 

This is an old video I did mix 9.18 mm improvements up with 9.19 patch and this video. I don't know how I manged that. If any of this does apply to ranked or not I don't know. You're right it's a different mode altogether but the system is just a stripped and reworked version of random matches MM id assume.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users