Jump to content


Wargaming! When are you going to fix the MatchMaker ?


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

Zinken33 #1 Posted 25 December 2017 - 11:11 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 10031 battles
  • 37
  • [S-GFL] S-GFL
  • Member since:
    02-28-2017

I am so tired of constantly and 90% of the time end up on the team with worst rating! This is ruining the game for me and I hate stop stop playing in outher aspects a great game! But when you time after time end up with a bunch of orange and red players and the ouher team has Purple, blues and greens you end up loseing 0-15 in 3 min time and time again.

 

It can´t be that damn hard to take the rating of players in account when matching up teams!

 

 

Close to the edge now!



AlbertL612 #2 Posted 25 December 2017 - 11:34 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 8314 battles
  • 72
  • [ARM] ARM
  • Member since:
    07-14-2012
Never

lord_chipmonk #3 Posted 25 December 2017 - 11:36 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 32183 battles
  • 10,166
  • [-HOW-] -HOW-
  • Member since:
    12-23-2012
No thanks. 

Junglist_ #4 Posted 25 December 2017 - 11:50 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35135 battles
  • 1,300
  • Member since:
    06-17-2013
47% WR player complaining about bad teams...

AvengerOrion #5 Posted 26 December 2017 - 12:04 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 25317 battles
  • 991
  • Member since:
    12-21-2013

Wow, did the OP really free xp the whole UK TD line just to get the 183? And most of the UK heavy line for the FV215b? :facepalm:


Edited by AvengerOrion, 26 December 2017 - 12:08 AM.


Stat_Padder #6 Posted 26 December 2017 - 12:08 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 37084 battles
  • 542
  • Member since:
    04-29-2011

View PostZinken33, on 25 December 2017 - 10:11 PM, said:

I am so tired of constantly and 90% of the time end up on the team with worst rating! This is ruining the game for me and I hate stop stop playing in outher aspects a great game! But when you time after time end up with a bunch of orange and red players and the ouher team has Purple, blues and greens you end up loseing 0-15 in 3 min time and time again.

 

It can´t be that damn hard to take the rating of players in account when matching up teams!

 

 

Close to the edge now!

 

Here we go again another 40% kiddy complaining about MM..... Yeah must be WG's MM that's making you a 40% cannon fodder player on battlefield, with your 29% survival rate and destruction and damage ratios only averaging at best only 1 :child:  I see the main fault of the game is what's between your chair and keyboard & mouse. 

RazielJr #7 Posted 26 December 2017 - 12:17 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 29451 battles
  • 14
  • [TMM] TMM
  • Member since:
    10-19-2012
MM is fine, deal with it. #gitgud #pro

Junglist_ #8 Posted 26 December 2017 - 12:21 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35135 battles
  • 1,300
  • Member since:
    06-17-2013

View PostAvengerOrion, on 25 December 2017 - 11:04 PM, said:

Wow, did the OP really free xp the whole UK TD line just to get the 183? And most of the UK heavy line for the FV215b? :facepalm:

 

Ah seems like you spotted WGs target audience for the recent tank swaps.



VsUK #9 Posted 26 December 2017 - 12:42 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14288 battles
  • 1,301
  • Member since:
    06-19-2012

Apparently, playing the klondike grand battle & your team is mostly meds & tds & the enmy have 5 type 5 heavy's & a ton of maus's & E-100s & 3 T-100 LT to boot is what WG call balance. Completely one sided battle on the grandest or scales.

WG will never fix match making, because they make money from it. I cant find the post, but someone on here showed statistics over a long period how players win rates & the teams they get is effected by how much they spend. It suggested the game's mechanic's sweetened the teams in favour of those who spend more than others, by making the enemy easier to beat. 


But ask yourselves this. Do you really think a company that avoids paying tax's by channelling all purchases through luxembourg will be thinking more about fairness than money?



German_Dunc #10 Posted 26 December 2017 - 01:09 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35707 battles
  • 1,866
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

If money directly correlated to WR, I'd be 65% overall, not 55%.

 

wanna know how to win games? Fire your gun... it's that simple. The more damage you as a player do, the more likely you are to win. You don't get a 60% WR by expecting to be handed a decent team.

 

 

 

 



VsUK #11 Posted 26 December 2017 - 01:23 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14288 battles
  • 1,301
  • Member since:
    06-19-2012

View PostGerman_Dunc, on 26 December 2017 - 12:09 AM, said:

If money directly correlated to WR, I'd be 65% overall, not 55%.

 

wanna know how to win games? Fire your gun... it's that simple. The more damage you as a player do, the more likely you are to win. You don't get a 60% WR by expecting to be handed a decent team.

 

 

 

 

 

Wrong, This has been proven time & time again. Prime example. 1 E-100 using premium ammo up against an E-100 using standard ammo. 1 on 1 for testing. The Premium ammo aimed at armour normal ammo won't pen & the other aimed at weak spots reg ammo should pen. Every time, the Premium ammo using E-100 won with more than half the HP left, because more than half the reg ammo E-100 failed to pen or bounced. 

Money wins you games, fact. The more you spend, the more you win, it's as simple as that. Everyone know's how to fire their guns. Trying to act clever by preaching with the learn to aim rubbish is what children use when they have nothing better to say. When you fire 10 shots & you hit 10 times. That's called accurate aiming. When only 2 of those shots pen, that's got nothing to do with aim. That's the games RNG deciding your shots won't do anything. That retical you see for aiming, usually a circle. Your shot can land anywhere inside that circle. So, unless you have something we don't that make's it land on the centre all the time. Quit with the usual childish replies! 

Long_Range_Sniper #12 Posted 26 December 2017 - 01:34 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 29462 battles
  • 7,545
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-04-2011

View PostVsUK, on 26 December 2017 - 12:23 AM, said:

That retical you see for aiming, usually a circle. Your shot can land anywhere inside that circle. So, unless you have something LIKE AN AIMBOT that make's it land on the centre all the time. 

 

FIFY

 

View PostVsUK, on 26 December 2017 - 12:23 AM, said:

That's called accurate aiming. 

 

How your keyboard didn't explode with shame typing those words is a mystery.



AvengerOrion #13 Posted 26 December 2017 - 01:37 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 25317 battles
  • 991
  • Member since:
    12-21-2013

View PostVsUK, on 26 December 2017 - 01:23 AM, said:

 

Wrong, This has been proven time & time again. Prime example. 1 E-100 using premium ammo up against an E-100 using standard ammo. 1 on 1 for testing. The Premium ammo aimed at armour normal ammo won't pen & the other aimed at weak spots reg ammo should pen. Every time, the Premium ammo using E-100 won with more than half the HP left, because more than half the reg ammo E-100 failed to pen or bounced. 

Money wins you games, fact. The more you spend, the more you win, it's as simple as that. Everyone know's how to fire their guns. Trying to act clever by preaching with the learn to aim rubbish is what children use when they have nothing better to say. When you fire 10 shots & you hit 10 times. That's called accurate aiming. When only 2 of those shots pen, that's got nothing to do with aim. That's the games RNG deciding your shots won't do anything. That retical you see for aiming, usually a circle. Your shot can land anywhere inside that circle. So, unless you have something we don't that make's it land on the centre all the time. Quit with the usual childish replies! 

 

Everyone knows how to aim? Nice try, except the OP has a hit rating of 46,5%

And if spending money would grant you great stats the OP would be a super unicorn since he paid for 20 premium tanks and spent hundereds of euros gold on free xp to skip (full) tanklines.

But if I was you I'd wrap some more tinfoil around my head, you can never be too sure.


Edited by AvengerOrion, 26 December 2017 - 02:15 AM.


German_Dunc #14 Posted 26 December 2017 - 01:38 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35707 battles
  • 1,866
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

Did I say learn to aim?

 

no, I said fire the damn gun... here's what I mean; after your next few games, look at the detailed results for the blues/purples - guarantee the overall trend will show they fire their gun a lot more than anyone else. They do more damage, more of the time, therefore they contribute more, therefore they're more likely to win. Its not particularly difficult - the trick is staying alive whilst doing it (I.e. Not base camping to farm dmg like a [edited]). 

 

Money doesn't come into it in the broader picture. You can run full gold in your E-100, but if you only fire the gun once per game before dying then you'll only have done one shot 



MR_FIAT #15 Posted 26 December 2017 - 02:09 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 18460 battles
  • 1,529
  • [_RBP_] _RBP_
  • Member since:
    05-16-2015

step 1: uninstall XVM

step2: git gud



Zenith #16 Posted 26 December 2017 - 02:19 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 4450 battles
  • 3,236
  • Member since:
    07-05-2010

Never. Very rarely will you see a match which isn't a complete steamroll for one side or the other, and if you do, then it's a rarity to be savoured. The devs seem to want the game this way, and so it has been for years. I got back into the game again recently, after a long absence, and my first match reminded me why; before I could even reach the front, half my team had melted away. That's WoT in a nutshell, and if you can't live with it, then you can't play this game.

 

Oh, and get rid of XVM, nothing's worse than seeing how horribly stacked the good and bad players are, especially if you're already on a losing streak. There's no way in hell those stacks are random, and we all know it.

 

 



cragarion #17 Posted 26 December 2017 - 02:27 AM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 41791 battles
  • 2,164
  • Member since:
    07-10-2010

View PostZinken33, on 25 December 2017 - 11:11 PM, said:

I am so tired of constantly and 90% of the time end up on the team with worst rating! This is ruining the game for me and I hate stop stop playing in outher aspects a great game! But when you time after time end up with a bunch of orange and red players and the ouher team has Purple, blues and greens you end up loseing 0-15 in 3 min time and time again.

 

It can´t be that damn hard to take the rating of players in account when matching up teams!

 

 

Close to the edge now!

 

Perhaps if they were not so busy closing threads because topics are supposed to be discussed in the appropriate  sticky about the subject, they would have time to fix stuff.

Zenith #18 Posted 26 December 2017 - 02:32 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 4450 battles
  • 3,236
  • Member since:
    07-05-2010

View Postcragarion, on 26 December 2017 - 01:27 AM, said:

 

Perhaps if they were not so busy closing threads because topics are supposed to be discussed in the appropriate  sticky about the subject, they would have time to fix stuff.

 

Developers and forum moderators are two very different beasts, with no overlap whatsoever. WG have the time, they have all the time in the world, they just don't want to use it for MM woes. 


Edited by Zenith, 26 December 2017 - 02:32 AM.


German_Dunc #19 Posted 26 December 2017 - 09:18 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35707 battles
  • 1,866
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

View PostZenith, on 26 December 2017 - 02:19 AM, said:

Never. Very rarely will you see a match which isn't a complete steamroll for one side or the other, and if you do, then it's a rarity to be savoured. The devs seem to want the game this way, and so it has been for years. I got back into the game again recently, after a long absence, and my first match reminded me why; before I could even reach the front, half my team had melted away. That's WoT in a nutshell, and if you can't live with it, then you can't play this game.

 

Oh, and get rid of XVM, nothing's worse than seeing how horribly stacked the good and bad players are, especially if you're already on a losing streak. There's no way in hell those stacks are random, and we all know it.

 

 

 

The team skill level is only one factor in the steamroller thing - it's mostly down to map design. 

 

Some years ago WG decided (based on player feedback apparently) that what "most" players wanted was not a tense, tactical, thinking man's shooter lasting 10-15 minutes per game on Malinovka style maps, but actually a three minute, point-blank, twitch reaction, arena spazfest. 

 

Result - Stalingrad, Pilsen, Paris, Kharkov, and the ruining of things like Westfield, Redshire, Sand River, and so on. On a lot of the maps, results are pre-determined by team composition than player skill; for example, you get a couple of paper sniper TDs in your team on Kharkov with enemy team matches TDs being assault guns, then GG, HF, and thanks for all the fish.

 

In the long run, dumbing down of maps is self defeating - it's now entirely possible to play all day and never fire your gun over 200m. Thus, never learn map awareness, tactics, or anything else as your fail your way to Tier X. I've returned after a year's break, and have been astonished by the Tier III play happening in Tier X; full lemming trains down one side of the map is something you'd almost never see in end game... now it's pretty much standard operating procedure.

 

 



Schemezoid #20 Posted 26 December 2017 - 09:26 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 20141 battles
  • 2,710
  • Member since:
    11-29-2013
They are even planning on removing pref mm.... morons...




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users