Jump to content


Working as designed... what more is working as designed?

MM rigged teams

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
27 replies to this topic

Lilleman #1 Posted 07 August 2017 - 09:27 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 38399 battles
  • 743
  • [TORSK] TORSK
  • Member since:
    03-22-2011

My interest for this game has rapidly decreased. For a long time now I have felt like I am always bottom tank and to always fight higher tier tanks gets boring. So for the last seven days I did for fun keep track on the MM.

 

I have played all type of tanks and tiers except 1 and 10. I mostly played alone but also some in platoon. Pretty normal game play for me.

 

So i end up with 100 games.
18 times all tanks was the same tier.

38 times I was one tier below the highest tank

40 times two tiers below.

4 times I was +1 tier above the lowest tank

0 times I was + 2 tier above the lowest tank

 

So in 78% of my games I am to fight better tanks and in just 4% of my games I will see tanks that has lower tier than my own.

 

It is pretty obvious that this is not a mere chance but actually designed in this way working as designed. And I can not help but wondering what more in this game is… designed to adjust the player's chance to influence the outcome of the match?


Day one

-2, -1, -1, -1, -2, -1, -2, -1, -2, -1, +1, -2, -2, 0, -2, +1, -1, -2, -2, -1, -2, 0, -2, -2, -1, 0, -1, -1, -2, -1

 

Day two

0, -2, -2

 

Day 3

-1, 0, 0, -1, -2, 0, -1, -1, 0, -2, -2, -2, -1, -2

 

Day 4

-2, -2

 

Day 5

0, -2, +1, -1, -1, -2, -2, -2, -2, -1, -2, +1, -1, -1, 0, -2, 0, -2, 0, 0, -1, -1

 

Day 6

-1, -1, -2, -2,-2, 0, 0, -1, -1, -1, 0, -1, -1, -2, 0, -1, -1, 0 , -2, -1, -1

 

Day 7

-2, -2, -2, -2, -1, -1, -2, -1

 


Y_O_L_0 #2 Posted 07 August 2017 - 09:43 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 19186 battles
  • 906
  • [LGEND] LGEND
  • Member since:
    12-27-2012
This game needs +1/-1 match maker, even if we have to wait 20 secons in the queue instead of 2 seconds.

Eaglax #3 Posted 07 August 2017 - 09:44 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 18973 battles
  • 3,481
  • Member since:
    01-12-2012

It's only logical that you are rarely top tier(+2) with the new MM system, although I doubt that you were not even once top tier in 100 games...

 

there are 3 possible patterns

-3/5/7 

-5/10

-15

 

in total 45 possible places to be put in, but only 3 of them are top tier (+2). Because it seems like that the patterns don't have the same probability of being chosen by the MM, it's hard to say the exact chance of being +2 (my guess based on my personal experience would be >10%)

 



Slyspy #4 Posted 07 August 2017 - 09:48 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14193 battles
  • 16,542
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011
Oh look, a MM thread. 

Lilleman #5 Posted 07 August 2017 - 10:05 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 38399 battles
  • 743
  • [TORSK] TORSK
  • Member since:
    03-22-2011

View PostEaglax, on 07 August 2017 - 09:44 AM, said:

It's only logical that you are rarely top tier(+2) with the new MM system, although I doubt that you were not even once top tier in 100 games...

 

there are 3 possible patterns

-3/5/7 

-5/10

-15

 

in total 45 possible places to be put in, but only 3 of them are top tier (+2). Because it seems like that the patterns don't have the same probability of being chosen by the MM, it's hard to say the exact chance of being +2 (my guess based on my personal experience would be >10%)

 

 

Yes I fully agree with that but the interesting part is not how few times I been top tank but the number of times I been bottom. Compare the theoretic numbers to the actual.
I think that it works just as it is intended to be honest.

 

MM     Theory                      Actual

+ 2     3/45      = 7%         0%
+ 1     10/45     = 22%        4%
+ 0     15/45     = 33%        18%
- 1     15/45      = 33%        38%
- 2      7/45      = 15%        40%

 

Edited by Lilleman, 07 August 2017 - 10:05 AM.


Slyspy #6 Posted 07 August 2017 - 10:17 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14193 battles
  • 16,542
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostLilleman, on 07 August 2017 - 10:05 AM, said:

 

Yes I fully agree with that but the interesting part is not how few times I been top tank but the number of times I been bottom. Compare the theoretic numbers to the actual.
I think that it works just as it is intended to be honest.

 

MM     Theory                      Actual

+ 2     3/45      = 7%         0%
+ 1     10/45     = 22%        4%
+ 0     15/45     = 33%        18%
- 1     15/45      = 33%        38%
- 2      7/45      = 15%        40%

 

 

 

The system is designed to favour 3/5/7 as the default. 



spamhamstar #7 Posted 07 August 2017 - 10:20 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 64310 battles
  • 1,438
  • [LLAY] LLAY
  • Member since:
    12-02-2012

It's a shame you didn't also track which tiers you were playing for each game as this would have given a more accurate set of results. 

 

For example if you play tier 9 you can't possibly get -2 mm & clearly if you play tier 2 you can't be +2. 

 

Other threads have also shown that since the introduction of the new mm tier 8 in particular is suffering an increase in the number of -2 mm you will see due to the numbers of tier x players & the fact there will usually only be 6 of them in each battle.

 

So if you've played a large proportion of your games at these tiers it could somewhat skew your results.  I had thought there was something in the new mm that was meant to increase your chances of being top tier if you'd had a run of games where you were bottom tier.  Clearly not working as intended if this is the case as on avg you should be top tier something like 15-20% of the time depending what proportion of players are playing the same tier as you.



Cannes76 #8 Posted 07 August 2017 - 10:21 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 64619 battles
  • 1,616
  • [3V] 3V
  • Member since:
    04-16-2011
Really not necessary to make another of this kind of threads as the next patch will grab almost all tier 10's out of the equation, and thus making the situation for tier 8 play ok again.

tankqull #9 Posted 07 August 2017 - 10:24 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 20542 battles
  • 1,477
  • [-FD-] -FD-
  • Member since:
    08-31-2011

View PostSlyspy, on 07 August 2017 - 09:17 AM, said:

 

 

The system is designed to favour 3/5/7 as the default. 

 

and?

there are 3 types of 3-5-7 being top, mid and low tier. one would guess that the goal for the MM is to have a somewhat comparable distribution of the 3 possibilies. but being low tier in the 3-5-7 system is significantly favored in cases of T8 tanks nearly granted.

e.g. i have had 657 games in my defender before it saw its first T6 tank aka as being toptier...

 

all that needs to be done is to add a simple: if -> than row to the code similar to the map rotation system that denies having a 3-5-7 of the same tier distribution twice in a row.

that way you would end at a max of being 50% low tier as it would require to have multiple low tier matches in a row to get above that threshhold.


Edited by tankqull, 07 August 2017 - 10:34 AM.


Gremlin182 #10 Posted 07 August 2017 - 10:33 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 46714 battles
  • 7,943
  • Member since:
    04-18-2012

I suspect the reality of +-1 mm or as some suggested on other threads +-0 would get very boring very quickly.

 

In this team game although you may be bottom tier your entire team is not so you are not always fighting tanks 2 tiers higher.

Worst case you are fighting some +2 tanks some +1 tanks and some same tier tanks.

You earn more points fighting Higher tiers.

 

Wargaming have spent a lot of time balancing tanks based on the enemies they will face this was the reason some tanks had special matchmaking.

Usually this was because their guns were not good enough to fight higher tier tanks.

 

+1 mm effectively gives this advantage to all tanks so maybe they will have to rebalance tanks again because now they don't have to fight against +2 opposition.

 

Have to redo a number of Personal missions as well



OneSock #11 Posted 07 August 2017 - 10:35 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 34000 battles
  • 1,667
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    06-06-2011
your sample size is way too small. But yeah things at tier 9/8 are not working optimally. most games are tier 10

malachi6 #12 Posted 07 August 2017 - 10:44 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 49264 battles
  • 3,238
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011
I will guarantee this "data" is spread across multiple tiers and tanks.  Making the data as useful as that provided by shampoo commercials.

Aikl #13 Posted 07 August 2017 - 10:48 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25167 battles
  • 4,253
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

3-5-7 is probably working as intended. It's a way of easing up bottom-tier games while it can give every player an opportunity to have a good game once in a while (when they're top tier). However, it was a good idea on paper, but ultimately results amplifying the very problem it is trying to solve.

The problem is that 3-5-7 is the main priority, which does not go well with uneven tier distribution (and, I guess, a tier system with an end). The matchmaker is supposed to not put you on the bottom constantly, but is apparently ignoring that 'rule' in order to make more matches faster. Apart from sheer statistics, that's probably why platoons can have a hard time being top-tier.

 

 

9.18 remains a highlight of MM - the matchmaker was allowed to use one- and two-tier battle patterns if that was the best fit. Maybe some of the reason was that the post-9.18 MM overall was better than pre-9.18, but it should be fresh enough in our minds that at least some of us would argue that we're whining for no reason. I've yet to see someone state that.



Lilleman #14 Posted 07 August 2017 - 10:52 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 38399 battles
  • 743
  • [TORSK] TORSK
  • Member since:
    03-22-2011

View Postmalachi6, on 07 August 2017 - 10:44 AM, said:

I will guarantee this "data" is spread across multiple tiers and tanks.  Making the data as useful as that provided by shampoo commercials.

 

I really not sure what you try to say. 

a) I am lying and the data is made up?

b) If I play normal with different tanks and tiers then the MM works different?

c) You are in need of shampoo?

 

Take it for what it is, Normal game play for seven days with normal tanks. I have nor time nor interest to play thousands of games to lag and analyze them. With 100 random games this is what came up and I dearly doubt the coming 100 games will look very different. Feel free to add your own :) 

 



Dis4ster #15 Posted 07 August 2017 - 10:53 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 27952 battles
  • 2,940
  • Member since:
    02-12-2012
And the best part of this is the fact that 90% of the community is braindead and you have to carry even if you are bottom tier. Oh and not to forget that if you are bottomtier even your premium ammo is not strong enough to pen this idiotic OP armored tanks, well thats balance right, just flank.:facepalm:

malachi6 #16 Posted 07 August 2017 - 11:50 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 49264 battles
  • 3,238
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011

View PostDis4ster, on 07 August 2017 - 10:53 AM, said:

And the best part of this is the fact that 90% of the community is braindead and you have to carry even if you are bottom tier. Oh and not to forget that if you are bottomtier even your premium ammo is not strong enough to pen this idiotic OP armored tanks, well thats balance right, just flank.:facepalm:

 

Did you know that 498% of all stats are made up on the spot.  And people that people that do not realise that brain dead is an odd pejorative to apply to an active gamer.  Should not use the word brain dead?

 

But then what would hyperbole be if people did not use it?


Edited by malachi6, 07 August 2017 - 11:57 AM.


Lilleman #17 Posted 09 August 2017 - 10:19 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 38399 battles
  • 743
  • [TORSK] TORSK
  • Member since:
    03-22-2011

125 Games / 10 days and not a single +2 game.

Last 25 games never +1 and just twice all same tier. 
And yep I am sure this is working as designed. 

As a I am not paying for this game I am not a valuable customer. 
Better to keep the ppl that actually pay for the game happy and Yes i can understand that. 
But I would like it better if they had been honest with it.

 

Day 8

-2, -2, -2, -1, -1

 

Day 9

-1, -1, -1, -1, -2, -2, 0, -2, -2, 0, -2, -1

 

Dag 10

-1, -1,- 2,-2,-1,-2, -1,-1

 


Private_Pearts #18 Posted 09 August 2017 - 10:58 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 21527 battles
  • 522
  • [WOPR] WOPR
  • Member since:
    02-24-2015

View PostSlyspy, on 07 August 2017 - 09:48 AM, said:

Oh look, a MM thread.

 

Oh look. That's because WG can't get MM right.

ZlatanArKung #19 Posted 09 August 2017 - 11:04 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
Welcome to what WG considers close to a 'perfect' matchmaker.

Kartoshkaya #20 Posted 09 August 2017 - 11:05 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23414 battles
  • 335
  • Member since:
    01-01-2015

View PostPrivate_Pearts, on 09 August 2017 - 10:58 PM, said:

 

Oh look. That's because WG can't get MM right.

 

I hope the thread spam will not stop until MM fix




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users