Jump to content


Optimized team assembly logic = FLAWED!


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

Sfinski #1 Posted 12 October 2017 - 06:00 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 29721 battles
  • 1,990
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    09-26-2013

Improvements to the matchmaker don’t end with the introduction of vehicle roles. Along with adding them, we addressed some of your most vocal requests:

  • Better chances of getting ranked at the top of the list for Platoon players:Initially, their chances of playing at the top were reduced to avoid upsetting scenarios with Platoons singlehandedly deciding the battle outcome. In direct response to community feedback, we’re raising them slightly so that you and your Platoon mates can fight at higher tiers once in a while. This won’t cause any drastic changes to the state of Random Battles, but offers a more varied experience to Platoon players.
  • Equal chances of getting ranked in the top/middle/bottom of the list for different vehicle classes: You might have noticed that heavy and medium tanks would end up in single-level battles way too often, while arty and TDs tended to get ±2 and ±1 setups. We tweaked the matchmaker, evening out the odd for all vehicle classes.
  • Optimized team assembly logic: After some extra tuning, you’ll see more 3/5/7 and 5/10 teams, which should provide for a more enjoyable experience.
  • More Grand Battles: We increased the chance of getting matched in a Grand Battle, so that more players could playtest the new format.

 

MORE 3/5/7 battles? What are you smoking? It's been the MAIN problem! Too many bottom tier matches and now you are going to increase it even more? What the actual fornication?



JocMeister #2 Posted 12 October 2017 - 06:09 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 20521 battles
  • 1,599
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    08-03-2015

Its WG. Did you really expect them to do what people actually want?

 

 



NUKLEAR_SLUG #3 Posted 12 October 2017 - 06:23 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 26618 battles
  • 1,610
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015
What people actually want tho is to be top tier so they can bitchslap all the baby tanks. If you're bottom tier half the opposing team is the same tier, shoot them instead if the tier 10 scares you.

CmdRatScabies #4 Posted 12 October 2017 - 06:25 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 35178 battles
  • 3,540
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015
They will fine tune the new matchmaker a few times before they admit it sucks.  Probably take a drop in player numbers before someone swallows their pride / gets sacked.

omgdontkillme #5 Posted 12 October 2017 - 07:15 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 34931 battles
  • 375
  • [R41N] R41N
  • Member since:
    03-20-2015

View PostSfinski, on 12 October 2017 - 06:00 PM, said:

 

MORE 3/5/7 battles? What are you smoking? It's been the MAIN problem! Too many bottom tier matches and now you are going to increase it even more? What the actual fornication?

 

You should be good enough player to not to care about tiers. Why the salt then?

K_A #6 Posted 12 October 2017 - 07:27 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 13566 battles
  • 4,656
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    04-18-2013

View PostNUKLEAR_SLUG, on 12 October 2017 - 05:23 PM, said:

What people actually want tho is to be top tier so they can bitchslap all the baby tanks. If you're bottom tier half the opposing team is the same tier, shoot them instead if the tier 10 scares you.

 

I want a 33/33/33 spread of top/middle/bottom tier games. Not 10/10/80 like it seems to be nowadays.

Sfinski #7 Posted 12 October 2017 - 07:29 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 29721 battles
  • 1,990
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    09-26-2013

View Postomgdontkillme, on 12 October 2017 - 08:15 PM, said:

 

You should be good enough player to not to care about tiers. Why the salt then?

 

That statement makes 0 sense. Why wouldn't good players care about this?

_EXODUZ_ #8 Posted 12 October 2017 - 07:32 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 34165 battles
  • 1,935
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    11-05-2014

View PostSfinski, on 12 October 2017 - 07:29 PM, said:

 

That statement makes 0 sense. Why wouldn't good players care about this?

 

I like bottom tier games, more damage to do.

Isharial #9 Posted 12 October 2017 - 09:17 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 18312 battles
  • 2,130
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-19-2015

View PostK_A, on 12 October 2017 - 07:27 PM, said:

 

I want a 33/33/33 spread of top/middle/bottom tier games. Not 10/10/80 like it seems to be nowadays.

 

this would be nice, but how are you going to do it?

and how would the system work if your playing T10 or T1, since both are different types of MM structure? I can see T10 being put in a lot of same tier battles, but people seem to hate that all over the forums....


 

 

how will it work? will it just block people from entering battle until the right one can be made? and what if one cant be made, such as late at night in the lower tiers? will it revert and therefore be different to the 33% average? RNG on the chances?


 


 



Aikl #10 Posted 12 October 2017 - 09:37 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 25141 battles
  • 3,994
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

33/33/33 should be possible enough, though of course you can't expect miracles from the matchmaker. Would likely not be possible for the 3-5-7 pattern, though. That's probably here to stay - it's the perfect mix of 'easier to be bottom-tier', 'use more premium ammo' and 'top tanks club everything'. Everyone happy? Well, close enough, apparently. Nevermind the potential problems of being bottom-tier a lot and creating larger variance by smaller 'sample sizes' for top-tier tanks.

 

Anyway, as much as I enjoy playing in platoons, I'm not very fond of the combination of more 3-5-7 and more top-tier platoons. With three top-tier tanks on each team we've already got potential for quite wonky variance in their performance - be it by player skill or class. Well, if I'm in that platoon, I'm not going to complain if we get matched up against someone training their crew from 50% in their Löwes. However, roflstomping the enemy team is still not actually fun, despite winning the game and earning easy credits/experience.

 

Matching tank roles makes sense, if that extends to platoons it'll even out a bit more if you have some very, very specialized platoons. I mean, three Emil 2s in a platoon on a flat map gets matched up against a platoon of Mäuschen? GLHF! Platooning T8 PMM at the moment is shoddy at best; in the rare event that you get to be on top, the enemy team could very well get two-three Defenders. So fun combating that in the FCM 50t. Let's hope that's considered into the mix. 



K_A #11 Posted 12 October 2017 - 09:56 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 13566 battles
  • 4,656
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    04-18-2013

View PostIsharial, on 12 October 2017 - 08:17 PM, said:

 

this would be nice, but how are you going to do it?

and how would the system work if your playing T10 or T1, since both are different types of MM structure? I can see T10 being put in a lot of same tier battles, but people seem to hate that all over the forums....


 

 

how will it work? will it just block people from entering battle until the right one can be made? and what if one cant be made, such as late at night in the lower tiers? will it revert and therefore be different to the 33% average? RNG on the chances?

 

Well it worked better without the template BS than what we have now. Of course t10 would be different, as well as all pmm tanks and 1-3. IMO best option would be to take the new upcoming matching tanks according to their roles, but ditch the templates altogether and go back to random. The old system after all kept count on how much top/mid/bottom tier games you had and if you started to get too many bottom tiers it would put you higher up the team list.



Isharial #12 Posted 12 October 2017 - 10:06 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 18312 battles
  • 2,130
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-19-2015

View PostK_A, on 12 October 2017 - 09:56 PM, said:

 

Well it worked better without the template BS than what we have now. Of course t10 would be different, as well as all pmm tanks and 1-3. IMO best option would be to take the new upcoming matching tanks according to their roles, but ditch the templates altogether and go back to random. The old system after all kept count on how much top/mid/bottom tier games you had and if you started to get too many bottom tiers it would put you higher up the team list.

 

true, but maybe it needs a slight adjustment so it doesn't match a few T8 heavies like vk 100p against maus as the "match up"?

 

 

 



K_A #13 Posted 12 October 2017 - 10:10 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 13566 battles
  • 4,656
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    04-18-2013

View PostIsharial, on 12 October 2017 - 09:06 PM, said:

 

true, but maybe it needs a slight adjustment so it doesn't match a few T8 heavies like vk 100p against maus as the "match up"?

 

 

 

 

Well of course match up the tanks tier for tier as well. So if one team ends up having two tier 8 superheavies the other team also has two tier 8 superheavies instead of having the superheavies at tier 10 and some lights as the tier 8's.

Richthoffen #14 Posted 12 October 2017 - 10:13 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 26517 battles
  • 2,444
  • Member since:
    12-23-2011

 

View PostCmdRatScabies, on 12 October 2017 - 06:25 PM, said:

They will fine tune the new matchmaker a few times and never admit it sucks.
 
 

 


Edited by Richthoffen, 12 October 2017 - 10:14 PM.


Aikl #15 Posted 12 October 2017 - 10:15 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 25141 battles
  • 3,994
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostK_A, on 12 October 2017 - 08:56 PM, said:

 

Well it worked better without the template BS than what we have now. Of course t10 would be different, as well as all pmm tanks and 1-3. IMO best option would be to take the new upcoming matching tanks according to their roles, but ditch the templates altogether and go back to random. The old system after all kept count on how much top/mid/bottom tier games you had and if you started to get too many bottom tiers it would put you higher up the team list.

 

It's still supposed to do that, but probably comes way too long down the list when trying to puzzle together everything. While a good idea, the 'tank role matchup' system feels like something that would confuse the matchmaker even more. It's pretty wonky even now in certain areas, though it's probably just me living on a pink fluffy cloud together with the other "WG shills".

 

 

View PostIsharial, on 12 October 2017 - 09:06 PM, said:

 

true, but maybe it needs a slight adjustment so it doesn't match a few T8 heavies like vk 100p against maus as the "match up"?

 

 

 

 

Or even matching 'weak' tanks vs strong ones. Tiger 2s vs Defenders... well, it's not a given that the Defenders will win, but still. Heck, even KV-5s vs ...well, Defenders, I guess. Chrews through just about anything else. :P

Homer_J #16 Posted 12 October 2017 - 10:21 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 27023 battles
  • 27,666
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View Post_EXODUZ_, on 12 October 2017 - 07:32 PM, said:

 

I like bottom tier games, more damage to do.

 

I do.

 

I like roast beef and Yorkshire puddings (with sprouts of course).

 

But I also like curry (yes, even sprout curry).

 

But I don't like the 3-5-7 template, and I think the changes they are proposing will only make it suck more.  I don't want to know that every time I take my Maus out there will be a Maus or Type 5 on the other team.  I want random!






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users