Jump to content


Unofficial 3-5-7 pattern survey.


  • Please log in to reply
65 replies to this topic

Poll: 3-5-7 vs. "traditional" matchmaking (162 members have cast votes)

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

Do you enjoy 3-5-7 when playing T4-8 tanks?

  1. Yes (37 votes [22.84%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 22.84%

  2. Indifferent (19 votes [11.73%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 11.73%

  3. No (106 votes [65.43%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 65.43%

Do you enjoy 3-5-7 when playing T9/10 tanks?

  1. No (40 votes [24.69%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 24.69%

  2. Indifferent (46 votes [28.40%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 28.40%

  3. Yes (76 votes [46.91%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 46.91%

Do you, overall, believe 3-5-7 is BETTER than the old matchmaking style?

  1. No (91 votes [56.17%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 56.17%

  2. Yes (54 votes [33.33%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 33.33%

  3. Indifferent (17 votes [10.49%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 10.49%

What do you think is the main BENEFIT of 3-5-7?

  1. Being bottom-tier is easier (57 votes [35.19%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 35.19%

  2. Being able to club harder as top-tier (35 votes [21.60%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 21.60%

  3. More variation (1 vote [0.62%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 0.62%

  4. More damage to farm! (8 votes [4.94%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 4.94%

  5. Other (6 votes [3.70%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 3.70%

  6. There are no particular benefits (55 votes [33.95%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 33.95%

What do you think is the main DISADVANTAGE with 3-5-7?

  1. More bottom-tier games (106 votes [65.43%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 65.43%

  2. More variability (chance of bad players/tanks on top affecting the outcome) (12 votes [7.41%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 7.41%

  3. Less chance to carry/matter in a match (15 votes [9.26%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 9.26%

  4. (Even more) reliance on premium ammo (11 votes [6.79%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 6.79%

  5. Encourages passive gameplay (4 votes [2.47%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 2.47%

  6. Encourages playing TDs/artillery - i.e. tanks performing well even as bottom-tier. (5 votes [3.09%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 3.09%

  7. There are no disadvantages (9 votes [5.56%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 5.56%

What kind of MM pattern do you prefer (pick the closest one)

  1. 3-5-7 (22 votes [13.58%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 13.58%

  2. 7-5-3 (5 votes [3.09%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 3.09%

  3. Other three-tier pattern (11 votes [6.79%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 6.79%

  4. 10-5 (8 votes [4.94%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 4.94%

  5. 5-10 (38 votes [23.46%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 23.46%

  6. 3-12 (5 votes [3.09%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 3.09%

  7. Other two-tier pattern (13 votes [8.02%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 8.02%

  8. Single-tier only (17 votes [10.49%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 10.49%

  9. A combination of 3-5-7, two- and one-tier matchups (12 votes [7.41%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 7.41%

  10. A combination of one- and two-tier matchups (24 votes [14.81%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 14.81%

  11. 5-5-5 (7 votes [4.32%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 4.32%

Vote Hide poll

Aikl #1 Posted 19 September 2017 - 03:40 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 25141 battles
  • 3,988
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

What do forum users really think of 3-5-7 (and small variations thereof) being the dominant matchmaking pattern? Yes, I know it's not the only pattern, but it is obviously the main one, with the matchmaker attempting to fit tanks into them as much as possible.

 

 

 Personally not a fan - but I've tried to make a somewhat neutral poll regardless.

 

(Public poll results because I might make graphs for poll choices vs skill level.)


Edited by Aikl, 19 September 2017 - 04:22 PM.


ZlatanArKung #2 Posted 19 September 2017 - 03:44 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
I would prefer the old tank weight system over a template based on.

Kozzy #3 Posted 19 September 2017 - 03:49 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 38497 battles
  • 2,288
  • [EAB2] EAB2
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011
+/-1 with 5-10mm /thread.

Spurtung #4 Posted 19 September 2017 - 03:50 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 60039 battles
  • 5,437
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013
5th question, you meant arty and TDs, right?

ApocalypseSquad #5 Posted 19 September 2017 - 03:51 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 26138 battles
  • 1,973
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

Tried to do the poll but failed.  Thing is that I think the idea is sound, 3:5:7 is a good balance.  It doesn't allow top tiers to dominate, and there are enough low tiers to give the bottom end something to do.

 


 

However we know it doesn't work, and the primary reason is the vastly different numbers of players playing certain tiers.  This makes it very difficult for certain tiers (8, I am looking at you...) to get into a match as top tier.


 

So ideally I would go with a mix of 3:5:7 and enough narrower tier matchups to flush out the excess tanks at certain tiers.



Dava_117 #6 Posted 19 September 2017 - 03:55 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 17567 battles
  • 2,160
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

I like the new mm much more than the previous one. At least you're not going to be the only tier 6 in a tier 8 battle anymore. 

Some issues are arised but, IMMO becuse of bad balance between certain tiers ( a bit tier 6-8 but most tier 8-10 ) and not because of the mm itself.

There is also the platoon problem, that I would solve increasing the chance for a single tire mm for platoon.



Mike_Mckay #7 Posted 19 September 2017 - 03:55 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16631 battles
  • 1,001
  • [-AWF-] -AWF-
  • Member since:
    09-02-2015
I actually like it


With the huge disparity between armour and pen it was frustrating as hell being one of only a couple of bottom or mid tier tanks with practically nothing you could pen or damage when most tanks were top tier


I think the 3/5/7 arrangement evens things out quite a bit and creates much better games than being able to have 10 tier 10s,3 tier 9s and 2 tier 8s and some of the other random variations we used to get before this was introduced

NiemandXL #8 Posted 19 September 2017 - 03:56 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 37955 battles
  • 2,934
  • Member since:
    01-30-2013
I'm actively avoiding all tiers that have +2 matchmaking atm. Only exception is when I need to farm credits.

Aikl #9 Posted 19 September 2017 - 03:59 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 25141 battles
  • 3,988
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostSpurtung, on 19 September 2017 - 02:50 PM, said:

5th question, you meant arty and TDs, right?

 

Yes, and the point was supposed to be more like "classes that do well as bottom-tier" - which for most tiers means TDs and arties. Light tanks to some extent, though they are not a dominant tank class on most maps.



ZlatanArKung #10 Posted 19 September 2017 - 04:01 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
Aikl, please, do a skill check after voting has ended.
To see if skill difference effects how people vote.
Example: if skilled players are more/less in favour of 3-5-7 then less skilled players.

Aikl #11 Posted 19 September 2017 - 04:15 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 25141 battles
  • 3,988
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011
:trollface:

Edited by Aikl, 19 September 2017 - 04:21 PM.


Asghaad #12 Posted 19 September 2017 - 04:18 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 13273 battles
  • 3,099
  • [PPDCZ] PPDCZ
  • Member since:
    01-23-2013

View PostApocalypseSquad, on 19 September 2017 - 03:51 PM, said:

Tried to do the poll but failed.  Thing is that I think the idea is sound, 3:5:7 is a good balance.  It doesn't allow top tiers to dominate, ...

 

tell me you are joking please ... having only 3 same tier opponents in T10 machine means absolute SLAUGHTER ... especially if you drive anything with good armor

 

and being toptier in 3-5-7 in lets say Obj252U is downright DISGUSTING ...



Baldrickk #13 Posted 19 September 2017 - 04:20 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29023 battles
  • 12,812
  • [-TAH-] -TAH-
  • Member since:
    03-03-2013
Personally, I think put 5-5-5 in there. Or go back to old style.

Actually, go back to old style and more open maps, bring back scout MM.

Aikl #14 Posted 19 September 2017 - 04:21 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 25141 battles
  • 3,988
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostZlatanArKung, on 19 September 2017 - 03:01 PM, said:

Aikl, please, do a skill check after voting has ended.
To see if skill difference effects how people vote.
Example: if skilled players are more/less in favour of 3-5-7 then less skilled players.

 

That's the idea, Zlatan. Bit unsure of what to use as the "skill-axis", but it'll probably be PR or WN8. PR might be less 'paddable', or at least better than winrate.

...

 

On a side note, I've previously suggested that 3-5-7 tries to solve the problem of being bottom-tier, but making it bigger. It appears that the poll kind of agrees with me:

:trollface:

 

View PostBaldrickk, on 19 September 2017 - 03:20 PM, said:

Personally, I think put 5-5-5 in there. Or go back to old style.

Actually, go back to old style and more open maps, bring back scout MM.
 

 

Added, though can't exactly insert it without messing up the poor attempt at keeping it legible.

 

5-5-5 is an interesting idea indeed, though 3-5-7 reeks a bit of being made to fit the disparity between T8-9-10. I guess the point isn't to claim that patterns are the only solution, though the pre-9.18 matchmaker was more prone to 7-5-3 and 5-5-5. It was as such "covertly" included. ;)


Edited by Aikl, 19 September 2017 - 04:29 PM.


Mike_Mckay #15 Posted 19 September 2017 - 04:28 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16631 battles
  • 1,001
  • [-AWF-] -AWF-
  • Member since:
    09-02-2015

View PostAikl, on 19 September 2017 - 03:21 PM, said:

 

That's the idea, Zlatan. Bit unsure of what to use as the "skill-axis", but it'll probably be PR or WN8. PR might be less 'paddable', or at least better than winrate.

...

 

On a side note, I've previously suggested that 3-5-7 tries to solve the problem of being bottom-tier, but making it bigger. It appears that the poll kind of agrees with me:

:trollface:

 

 

Added, though can't exactly insert it without messing up the poor attempt at keeping it legible.

 

5-5-5 is an interesting idea indeed, though 3-5-7 reeks a bit of being made to fit the disparity between T8-9-10.

 

That said however, bottom tier "could" be both easier AND too frequent, the two aren't mutually exclusive

vasilinhorulezz #16 Posted 19 September 2017 - 04:32 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 21101 battles
  • 866
  • Member since:
    09-26-2014

Although I do enjoy, the 3-5-7 system more, because it removes a lot of frustrations (like being the single bottom tier tank), it also created a few more.

 

The important 3 in my opinion are:

 

1. Tier 8 matchmaking is pretty bad with way more than half of the games being bottom tier in both T10 and T9 mm (in a two tier spread),

and being top tier most of the time means single tier mm.

 

2. Importance of competent players in top tier tanks,

because the 3 top tier tanks you get must be able to carry their weight in order for this to work (half of the time your top tiers die at the start of the game, and then you just wait your turn to get farmed by enemy top tiers), especially noticeable in T10 mm, and completely balanced super heavies)

 

3. Game development (and gameplay in general ) depends a lot more on tank classes,

when your 3 T10s are 2 TDs and an Arty what are you gonna do in a T8 heavy or medium tank (especialy the fact that some times one team can get to front lines TDs like JP E 100 or FV215 183, while your teamgets two Grilles, or when one team has a Type 5 and a Mause and the other gets a T57 and AMX 50B)?



Aikl #17 Posted 19 September 2017 - 04:37 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 25141 battles
  • 3,988
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostMike_Mckay, on 19 September 2017 - 03:28 PM, said:

 

That said however, bottom tier "could" be both easier AND too frequent, the two aren't mutually exclusive

 

No, nor are the same people voting for both. Anyway, even without being mutually exclusive, the picture suggests that a lot of people enjoy what is supposedly meant to be the primary feature of 3-5-7 - while at the same time a lot of people dislike the effect of 3-5-7. 

That would suggest that there is some way of making both camps happy - somehow figure out a way that bottom-tier is easier, while not creating as many battles. It is creating some basis for options in future polls - kind of like the last question, which here is included mainly for making a graph that shows what kind of players enjoy 3-5-7 and who don't (if that makes sense).

 

View Postvasilinhorulezz, on 19 September 2017 - 03:32 PM, said:

Spoiler

 

 

These are essentially what I think too, and should be reflected in the poll. #2 is more or less 'variability', and actually something that WG seems to work on addressing (at least in Ranked Battles, but being beta it's not surprising that would be the first place for a field test). #3 is why I believe that 'fewer but harder' is preferrable to 'more but easier', in a sense. 

 


Edited by Aikl, 19 September 2017 - 04:40 PM.


cro001 #18 Posted 19 September 2017 - 04:42 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27853 battles
  • 1,888
  • Member since:
    10-21-2012

MM will never be fine as long as maps suck and tier and class power gaps are huge.



Zhongze_Li #19 Posted 19 September 2017 - 04:49 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 8454 battles
  • 201
  • [HAV0C] HAV0C
  • Member since:
    10-29-2015
I would argue that 3-5-7 only partially solves the problem by having more lower tier tanks. However the fundamental reason why people whine is due to the inferiority when facing +2 opponents. Having more lower-tier tank does not touch the underlying factor, although it does make the life of low-tier tank somewhat easier.

This I would argue more +-1 tier and same tier game should be the solution. The +-2 should happen seldomly or when the higher tier player number is too low, but WG wants money so this is not going to happen.

Steve8066 #20 Posted 19 September 2017 - 05:16 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 9578 battles
  • 543
  • Member since:
    10-06-2015
Personally if you brought the credit cost of premium ammo to a more reasonable level (the current ratio between standard and premium is disgusting), then quite a few of my problems with the 357 MM will go away.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users