Jump to content


Matchmaking Discussion Thread

MM

  • Please log in to reply
8285 replies to this topic

Kozzy #8241 Posted 12 July 2018 - 08:32 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 38750 battles
  • 2,648
  • [EAB2] EAB2
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View PostLong_Range_Sniper, on 12 July 2018 - 06:30 AM, said:

 

...You do wonder if some people should be licensed to go on the internet.

 

This forum would be nearly empty through so many people racking up points on their licenses!



Long_Range_Sniper #8242 Posted 12 July 2018 - 08:51 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 30246 battles
  • 8,136
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-04-2011

View PostKozzy, on 12 July 2018 - 07:32 AM, said:

 

This forum would be nearly empty through so many people racking up points on their licenses!

 

That is true, but in this instance I don't think he'd pass the test anyway.

 

"OK sir, could you please read the number plate on that green car over there."

 

"You mean on the red car"



jabster #8243 Posted 12 July 2018 - 08:56 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12526 battles
  • 22,406
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostLong_Range_Sniper, on 12 July 2018 - 07:51 AM, said:

 

That is true, but in this instance I don't think he'd pass the test anyway.

 

"OK sir, could you please read the number plate on that green car over there."

 

"You mean on the red car"

 

Look it was hardly my fault that the car ending up in a ditch was misinterpreted as a dangerous manoeuvre.

Simeon85 #8244 Posted 12 July 2018 - 10:20 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 1097 battles
  • 2,053
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View PostMike_Mckay, on 10 July 2018 - 05:16 PM, said:

 






















 

 

:facepalm:

 

Block Quote

 I did, but perhaps not as clearly as I could, although I do see players with 50k battles and stats that are worse or not much better than mine they don't (to me) seem to be the majority, as I check the wr and eff of both teams before every game the "norm" seems to be that the high game count, higher than average win rate and higher than average eff scores go hand in hand "most" of the time and same with wr and eff scores

 

Yeah you get occasional anomalies like high win rates but crap stats or low win rates but really good stats and both of those with high or low game counts, but theyre certainly not the majority by a long chalk.

So my point was that generally a 50k games player will in the same tank do better than someone with 10 or 20k games but because also "generally" 50k players will be better players with both higher win rates and higher eff scores not merely because of the game count

 

 

So aside from your anecdotal observation, which is clearly biased, you have nothing to support what you said.

 

Whilst you'd expect experience to help players play better, it is very clear in world of tanks for this commonly not to be the case and that 10k battle players on average will be no worse than 50k battles players.

 

So you were wrong. 

 

Block Quote

 As for the last bit nope, a disparity of mismatched games either in your favour or not could easily throw a win rate up or down a few percent. Which would show up clearly when those two players face ranked opponents. That is the very essence of "random", some people will randomly get more "good" teams some will randomly get more "bad" ones. so in that example if WOT was a ranked system the one player could have actually been a 58% player whilst the other could have been a 50% player

 

This is just utter rubbish. 

 

Across a large enough statistical sample, 'random' by definition will mean that two players will have experienced similar teams, if two players have 20-30k battles then their win rate is their win rate because they have faced the same level of bad teams, good teams, average teams as other 20-30k battle players. 

 

Block Quote

 That is the very essence of "random", some people will randomly get more "good" teams some will randomly get more "bad" ones

 

This statement is just false and complete scrub nonsense. 

 

It's very much "I am bad because I get bad luck with teams" nonsense. 

 

Block Quote

 You only really see "skill" in the true sense of the word when someone faces a fairly equal opponent. That's in fact the whole point of ranked competitions, it takes loose groupings and more accurately redefines them in terms of a genuine pecking order far more accurately

 

No you see skill when players have had been treated equally and one has done better than the other showing they have coped better with what the game has thrown at them.

 

Thus one player is better than the other.

 

Block Quote

 So if 10% of some peoples games are mismatched then its actually just as likely that good players win rates would increase and poor players would decrease in more even games as the opposite (unless its you claiming the games are rigged in fact)

 

Everyone's games will be mismatched.

 

That is the essence of random MM that is skill blind, EVERYONE will have had very bad teams and over a similar number of games they have had a similar number of very bad teams. 

 

Block Quote

 Because if it is actually random, theres no reason at all that many good players could be getting dumped on the "bad" teams more than good thereby lowering their win rates whilst many bad players are getting put on good teams upping theirs above what they should have

 

They are not.

 

No one is getting more bad teams than anyone else.

 

As Baldrick's replay analyser clearly shows. 

 

Block Quote

 So if those games were then replaced by more equal games the good players would have a bigger impact and if better than their opposing peers would take their team to wins whilst the poorer players would generally not have much impact either way so their overall results would still be mostly dictated by the luck of the draw. But for ones who were getting a favourable spread of mismatched games they would most likely have a drop in wr where those getting a bad spread might see a small increase. But that's just the downside to mixed skill games and isn't a good or bad thing, just the reality of it. That probably the bottom half of both teams in most games aren't really instrumental in the win in to a large degree and are just along for the ride as everyone can only play to their current level good or bad so pretty much every game is a "carry" to some extent or another

 

More rubbish along the same lines, if you start on a false premise then anything you draw from it is pointless.

 

Block Quote

 So when someone claims that removing mismatched games can "only" result in good players win rates dropping they are to some extent also claiming that the games and teams ARE in fact rigged and that WG DOES in fact put good players on "good" teams and bad players on "bad" teams in the mismatched games so the ONLY possibility is for a drop in good players wr and a rise in poor players wr

 

No, there is no logic in what you say.

 

When someone claims that skilled based MM would result in good players losing WR it is because that is what would happen.

 

Because you would no longer be treating all players the same, the MM would shift from Fair -> Unfair, thus good players would be being punished for being good. 

 

Good players do not get on more good teams, they make every team they are on better BECAUSE THEY ARE GOOD.

 

That is how they have a higher win rate. The only constant in the MM is YOU thus whether you win more games or lose more games is dependant on how well you play and how you impact your teams.

 

How hard is that to understand. 

 

It is proven by the statistics of good players, they do more damage, more kills, live longer, spot more, block more damage etc. than other players and they do this consistently game after game.

 

This means they do more than their teammates and can make up for lesser players lack of contribution, meaning the team is more likely to win.

 

It is as simple as that.

 



DSsacul_666 #8245 Posted 12 July 2018 - 10:56 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 39786 battles
  • 84
  • [DRNKS] DRNKS
  • Member since:
    12-06-2012
When will you make improvements and fix matchmaking? :child:

OreH75 #8246 Posted 12 July 2018 - 01:49 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 46698 battles
  • 1,908
  • [RANGR] RANGR
  • Member since:
    05-29-2013

View PostDSsacul_666, on 12 July 2018 - 10:56 AM, said:

When will you make improvements and fix matchmaking? :child:

 

  Ah your monthly contribution to this thread! See you again in August....

DangerMouse #8247 Posted 12 July 2018 - 01:53 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 24578 battles
  • 584
  • [FLOG] FLOG
  • Member since:
    10-28-2010

View PostDSsacul_666, on 12 July 2018 - 09:56 AM, said:

When will you make improvements and fix matchmaking? :child:

 

Tomorrow.

DSsacul_666 #8248 Posted 12 July 2018 - 04:55 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 39786 battles
  • 84
  • [DRNKS] DRNKS
  • Member since:
    12-06-2012

View PostOreH75, on 12 July 2018 - 12:49 PM, said:

 

  Ah your monthly contribution to this thread! See you again in August....

 

Just waiting for an answer... Been waiting for a couple of years... :popcorn::teethhappy:

Katyusha_Taichou #8249 Posted 12 July 2018 - 04:59 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 25144 battles
  • 150
  • Member since:
    12-09-2012

View PostSimeon85, on 12 July 2018 - 09:20 AM, said:

 

Good players do not get on more good teams, they make every team they are on better BECAUSE THEY ARE GOOD.

 

 

 

I really didnt want to quote the entire large post :D  , but I agree with everything you wrote - well everyone with common sense must agree with you.

 

While I am not unicorn and never will be one, I usually play now for some 2K recent on various tiers, and try to think what could I do in battles when bottom tier, when in bad tank for played map, ... And my winrate, stats are slowly rising.

 

Since I started playing WoT for some "personal competitive style" - I simply want to be that blueberry - sometimes I for example performed suicidal action on encounter just to reset enemies cap and give time to another teamates who were slowly moving there as well, but if I didnt rush and decap they would not make it in time. This is example of very stupid move for personal stats, but when it saves the win well why not.

 

Now, I think one of the biggest problem of some players is that they think on every map you have one line for heavy tanks, one for spotters and mediums, and some camping spots. And if you go anywhere else with X Y vehicle class, they start pinging at you and writing that you are idiot going wrong way. Example of this would be when I go support mediums or provide support on longer range with bottom tier Tiger II on some maps. They just start with: stupid Tiger you are heavy, idiot... But why, why would I go with now very mediocre heavy against T9 T10 heavies with big guns when I dont have armor nor aplha damage to be usefull against them, when I can put KT laser gun in good use with our meds, or on longe range.

 

This was example. I think its not that bad idea with most bottom tier heavies to go with meds when map allows it.

 

I can go where I want with my tank no matter its class, when I will play well on that position. You can win one flank of map and then come back to defend base when enemies with the second, or just go cap ...



LordInfernus #8250 Posted 12 July 2018 - 09:26 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 24611 battles
  • 60
  • Member since:
    08-02-2012

I am still tired and fed up with 3 tier matches. I can plan and strategise all I like, but my gun does ding dong. Then if the top tiers have no brain and I end up against an opponenent that has 2 tiers on me, I can't be bothered to try and play. Most of the times I just feel like going banzai.

 

3 tiers in 1 game is not necessary. It has not been for a long time. Especially on a grind, it just ruins a lot of the fun. Same tiers matches are the best.

 

edit: I don't even mind the fact that some people do not know how to play..... I uninstalled XVM and suddenly I had a lot less frustration! :)


Edited by LordInfernus, 12 July 2018 - 09:32 PM.


duijm #8251 Posted 13 July 2018 - 08:24 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 42270 battles
  • 1,580
  • [RANGX] RANGX
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

I am missing our dear friend who only gets reds on his team and greens on the other team........maybe because it is not true?  Look how much he is winning with a wn8 lower than 1000.    Will he be sending WG an thank you note now?

 

 


Edited by duijm, 13 July 2018 - 08:25 AM.


Kozzy #8252 Posted 13 July 2018 - 08:26 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 38750 battles
  • 2,648
  • [EAB2] EAB2
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View PostLordInfernus, on 12 July 2018 - 08:26 PM, said:

I am still tired and fed up with 3 tier matches. I can plan and strategise all I like, but my gun does ding dong. Then if the top tiers have no brain and I end up against an opponenent that has 2 tiers on me, I can't be bothered to try and play. Most of the times I just feel like going banzai.

 

3 tiers in 1 game is not necessary. It has not been for a long time. Especially on a grind, it just ruins a lot of the fun. Same tiers matches are the best.

 

edit: I don't even mind the fact that some people do not know how to play..... I uninstalled XVM and suddenly I had a lot less frustration! :)

 

+/-2 MM does suck and I feel is legacy artefact that could do with updating.  With armour and alpha the way they are +/-1 MM would make a lot more sense.  Saying that, when bottom tier you just need to find other ways of being useful, think you you can be a better bottom tier for your team than the bottom tiers on the enemy team.  I was bottom tier in my su122-44 last night on Prokhorovka.  My gun wasn't going to help initially but I knew I had good camo so used that to get 6.5k spotting done for example.

 

Most sensible will eventually uninstall XVM.  Players need to just focus on their own game and not get distracted by pretty colours.


Edited by Kozzy, 13 July 2018 - 08:29 AM.


Baldrickk #8253 Posted 13 July 2018 - 02:09 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29304 battles
  • 13,334
  • [-TAH-] -TAH-
  • Member since:
    03-03-2013

View PostKozzy, on 13 July 2018 - 08:26 AM, said:

 

+/-2 MM does suck and I feel is legacy artefact that could do with updating.  With armour and alpha the way they are +/-1 MM would make a lot more sense.  Saying that, when bottom tier you just need to find other ways of being useful, think you you can be a better bottom tier for your team than the bottom tiers on the enemy team.  I was bottom tier in my su122-44 last night on Prokhorovka.  My gun wasn't going to help initially but I knew I had good camo so used that to get 6.5k spotting done for example.

 

Most sensible will eventually uninstall XVM.  Players need to just focus on their own game and not get distracted by pretty colours.

I think the variety of +2 is good. 

 

You know,  if there was actual variety and not bottom tier battles the vast majority of the time

 

It means that when you go into battle you need to play your vehicle in different ways, against different opponents, which is good and fun, as long as you are not always bottom tier.



Katyusha_Taichou #8254 Posted 13 July 2018 - 05:12 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 25144 battles
  • 150
  • Member since:
    12-09-2012

I don't mind +2 -2 MM now when I am better in game, but I think they could make it +1 -1. I am not programmer, but I think changing this would not be that hard. I also can't predict how much it could affect MM and creating battles with X Y numbers of players on different tiers avaiable, but I personally would not have a problem to wait lets say 30 seconds for battle. While I wrote in last post that I usually try to think what position I could use best when bottom tier in certain tank, I am still "tired" of getting 3x battles as bottom tier in a row.

 

Tier8 suffers from +2 -2 MM most. Its possibly to get into T10 like 3x, then you get one top tier battle, and then again tier 9 tier 10 battles. When I dont count premiums for credit farming, there are interesting tanks in tier8 I like to play due the historical reasons, tanks like Tiger II, IS-3 (it missed combat deployment tightly, but its easy to imagine then fighting Tigers), but when you get so many battles in tier10 now.. I know its only 3 tier10 tanks for each team, but if that 3 players are not tomatoes they can have extreme impact on battle.


Edited by Katyusha_Taichou, 13 July 2018 - 05:13 PM.


TANKOPPRESSION #8255 Posted 13 July 2018 - 11:00 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 40752 battles
  • 591
  • Member since:
    04-25-2012

View PostDSsacul_666, on 12 July 2018 - 09:56 AM, said:

When will you make improvements and fix matchmaking? :child:

 

There will never be any improvements to the matchmaking .

Steve8066 #8256 Posted 13 July 2018 - 11:02 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 10619 battles
  • 673
  • Member since:
    10-06-2015

View PostTANKOPPRESSION, on 13 July 2018 - 11:00 PM, said:

 

There will never be any improvements to the matchmaking .

 

there will cos the game will die without changes. its already started to.

TANKOPPRESSION #8257 Posted 13 July 2018 - 11:11 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 40752 battles
  • 591
  • Member since:
    04-25-2012

View PostSteve8066, on 13 July 2018 - 10:02 PM, said:

 

there will cos the game will die without changes. its already started to.

 

The matchmaking has been the same since the game left its launchpad .

define die because some people say the game is already dead .



Steve8066 #8258 Posted 13 July 2018 - 11:18 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 10619 battles
  • 673
  • Member since:
    10-06-2015

View PostTANKOPPRESSION, on 13 July 2018 - 11:11 PM, said:

 

The matchmaking has been the same since the game left its launchpad .

define die because some people say the game is already dead .

 

since i first started, numbers online are lower than ive ever seen this year since 1.0.0 was released.

TANKOPPRESSION #8259 Posted 14 July 2018 - 12:29 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 40752 battles
  • 591
  • Member since:
    04-25-2012

View PostSteve8066, on 13 July 2018 - 10:18 PM, said:

 

since i first started, numbers online are lower than ive ever seen this year since 1.0.0 was released.

 

I think myself there will enough turn over of players for this game for a long time and wargaming.net must think that aswell because they know precisely where the important points are in this game because I can point out inconsistencies in the game that should render it not playable on several levels .

So then it becomes important whether the game is the dead or dying for me or the individual player but not for wargaming.net because there is always another new gamer who will pay them for the next say 40000 battles as the game is now .

So see you in 30000 battles time . Good Luck .

 

 

 



LordMuffin #8260 Posted 14 July 2018 - 06:03 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 47395 battles
  • 10,512
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    06-21-2011

View PostTANKOPPRESSION, on 13 July 2018 - 11:11 PM, said:

 

The matchmaking has been the same since the game left its launchpad .

define die because some people say the game is already dead .

No. The MM has changed quite a lot. 

 

From +/-4 to +/-3 to +/-2.

For scouts from +/-5 and down to +/-2

For arty similar changes.

 

Then rules of the MM has changed, once it was tank weight based.

Now it is template based.

Both of these have changed aswell in their time.

 

So no, it has not been the same, and you are wrong.







Also tagged with MM

10 user(s) are reading this topic

1 members, 9 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Baldrickk