Jump to content


The main problem with world of tanks.

3 5 7 pay to win problem with world of tanks new players problem wargaming wargaming slowly ruin game bad money

  • Please log in to reply
81 replies to this topic

Poll: 3, 5, 7 matchmaking is good? (236 members have cast votes)

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

Do you think 3, 5, 7 matchmaking is good?

  1. Yes (62 votes [26.27%])

    Percentage of vote: 26.27%

  2. No (154 votes [65.25%])

    Percentage of vote: 65.25%

  3. No opinion (20 votes [8.47%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.47%

Vote Hide poll

G01ngToxicCommand0 #21 Posted 27 January 2018 - 06:03 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 37465 battles
  • 751
  • Member since:
    11-03-2011
I just suirush/suicide or Alt Tab to YouTube when being the 7 in a 3-5-7 mm battle as I am not playing cannonfodder to higher tiers. Wargaming wont change this nightmare mm unless there are so many complaints about players doing this that the game becomes unplayable. Also I play only like the reddest tomato now and don't want to play good or improve anything as that is just wasting my time - I play 4 Phun nauw!:B

Dava_117 #22 Posted 27 January 2018 - 06:29 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 20903 battles
  • 4,053
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014
Teamplate MM is one of the better thing WG made. I prefered it when didn't forced 3/5/7 cause I find single tier and +-1 buttle more balance, but sure is better than the old weighted MM!

I_Click_You_Noob #23 Posted 27 January 2018 - 06:31 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 282 battles
  • 6
  • Member since:
    09-10-2015

I do no like 3/5/7.

I do like MM before 3/5/7.

 



ZlatanArKung #24 Posted 27 January 2018 - 06:53 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1536 battles
  • 5,217
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
Template is a bad idea from the start imo.

Mike_Mee #25 Posted 27 January 2018 - 07:31 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 28470 battles
  • 30
  • [M-FGT] M-FGT
  • Member since:
    06-01-2013
The only players that like 3-5-7 are tier 10 players ;-)

​Seriously though, being bottom tier in 3-5-7 is ****. This primarily is aimed at tiers 6 and 8 which really struggle fighting two tiers up in general. Sure there are a few exceptions, like the Defender, the Patriot, Scorpion G.... Yeah you get the idea.....  

brumbarr #26 Posted 27 January 2018 - 07:33 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

View PostMike_Mee, on 27 January 2018 - 07:31 PM, said:

The only players that like 3-5-7 are tier 10 players ;-)

​Seriously though, being bottom tier in 3-5-7 is ****. This primarily is aimed at tiers 6 and 8 which really struggle fighting two tiers up in general. Sure there are a few exceptions, like the Defender, the Patriot, Scorpion G.... Yeah you get the idea.....  

 

Even tier10s dont like it because they now have a lot of full tierX games.

Procjon #27 Posted 27 January 2018 - 07:55 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 57174 battles
  • 636
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

The only way to balance MM is to divide players base into subgroups, 2 at least.

 

  1. I call them "Tardss" unable to learn under 4000 personal score
  2. I call them "Wannabebetter" able to learn over 4000 personal score

 

We can have more subgroups. The number can be changed but from my experience we have too many players that do SHIIIIIIIT in battle after battle and most of them  i see under 4000. It is one thing to fail in some of battles - we are only humans but we try - and it is completely different thing to fail in EACH battle.

 

You can advance and you can drop, all depends on your performance.

 

Why this division? because some of the people are simply intellectually lazy and they never change, they never learn, they are just comfortable to stay "dumb".

 

For example, i play only at work, afk around 70% and still my personal score is over 7k. Some of us don't have so much free time to spend on games and we like quality time when we do so. Unfortunately if we are put into the same basket of different skill players our joy experience drops.

 

HF

 

 

 

 


Edited by Procjon, 27 January 2018 - 07:56 PM.


Isharial #28 Posted 27 January 2018 - 08:16 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 21670 battles
  • 2,532
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-19-2015

View PostProcjon, on 27 January 2018 - 07:55 PM, said:

The only way to balance MM is to divide players base into subgroups, 2 at least.

 

  1. I call them "Tardss" unable to learn under 4000 personal score
  2. I call them "Wannabebetter" able to learn over 4000 personal score

 

We can have more subgroups. The number can be changed but from my experience we have too many players that do SHIIIIIIIT in battle after battle and most of them  i see under 4000. It is one thing to fail in some of battles - we are only humans but we try - and it is completely different thing to fail in EACH battle.

 

You can advance and you can drop, all depends on your performance.

 

Why this division? because some of the people are simply intellectually lazy and they never change, they never learn, they are just comfortable to stay "dumb".

 

For example, i play only at work, afk around 70% and still my personal score is over 7k. Some of us don't have so much free time to spend on games and we like quality time when we do so. Unfortunately if we are put into the same basket of different skill players our joy experience drops.

 

HF

 

 

 

 

 

the trouble with any form of "skill based MM" is that everyone will eventually end up the same as the worst possible player in that group, no matter their intelligence or skill.

yes, bad players are annoying, and even infuriating at times, but for actual balance, they are needed.


 

if you cut the bad players out, and everyone with, say, a 54% winrate is shoved in the same basket, they'll only fight people in their own basket, no one to "outplay", no one to teach them "better" play either. thus they are stuck at the same level regardless.

they'll also only ever win 50% of the time due to the fact that they all know how to play and what to do, thus no "omg I killed 12 tanks!!!"

if the players are equal, it would fall back to tank balance, any small difference between 2 tanks would be the deciding factor (excluding silly moves or criticals) and as much as you might think that is "better", its really not


 

id rather have the "noobs" and newbies around, not only can you teach them things, they'll also do the same to those that come after them. if you segregate them, none of them will learn (or be able to) and will find the game increasingly worse to play


 



Procjon #29 Posted 27 January 2018 - 08:49 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 57174 battles
  • 636
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

 


 

if you cut the bad players out, and everyone with, say, a 54% winrate is shoved in the same basket, they'll only fight people in their own basket, no one to "outplay", no one to teach them "better" play either. thus they are stuck at the same level regardless.

they'll also only ever win 50% of the time due to the fact that they all know how to play and what to do, thus no "omg I killed 12 tanks!!!"

if the players are equal, it would fall back to tank balance, any small difference between 2 tanks would be the deciding factor (excluding silly moves or criticals) and as much as you might think that is "better", its really not


 

id rather have the "noobs" and newbies around, not only can you teach them things, they'll also do the same to those that come after them. if you segregate them, none of them will learn (or be able to) and will find the game increasingly worse to play


 

 

You are missing the point, if we cut out the bottom players that bring nothing to the game except being a meat farm then we have a huge basket without upper cap so the player with over 4000 personal score can play with a player of 12000 score. This way the pool of players is big enough to still mix average with pro skills but you don't have players that brings nothing to the game.

 

I have games when 8 players sit in the base and basically move turret only. When i check their personal score, most of them fit between the range of 1600-3000 of personal score.

 

It is one thing to be a newbie, we all were in the past, but other thing is being a noob, this describes someone unable to learn and make progress.

 

The current system is something like to force Real Madrid to play with kids of age 6 and expect them to play it all the time and use an excuse "because kids need to learn". It never happens in real life but we get this in games. Either we create the system that eliminates the weakest and puts them together or we will complain forever. If someone after 10000 games has a score of 2500 i don't see any progress being made. And i see lots of players with over 30000 games and such score.

 

And finally you missed the most important point. I don't want to segregate players forever. Everyone has a chance to move up once they get better but as i said lots of people are just intellectually lazy and they will never move UP the ladder.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by Procjon, 27 January 2018 - 08:52 PM.


HidesHisFace #30 Posted 27 January 2018 - 09:01 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 17975 battles
  • 1,303
  • Member since:
    05-12-2012

Let's start off with the fact that MM in WoT was never good to begin with.

 

We had +4 MM globally and let never mention it again.

 

We had +3 MM with magical Type 59 wolfpacks rampaging through tier 5 tanks. So much "fun"!

 

We had +2 random MM that wen't through multiple abysmal phases - we had a phase with 12+ arties per team even - back in the day when arty was one-shoting stuff on regular basis. 

In the final form before these bloody templates, +2 MM was giving you reasonable even chance of landing bottom, mid or top tier, but randomness there was still off the charts - you could be a "top tier" with 12 tier X tanks, 2 tier IX and lonely poor tier VIII. Because of this, some lower tiers were virtually unplayable, like tier III that had unreasonably high chance to land as lonely bottom tier among tier V tanks. And we still had anomaly of scout MM but I digress.

 

Template system in theory solves all these problems - the principle is - 3-5-7 means that there is always plenty of bottom tiers, so they have better chances of meeting their equals and having an impact in battle.

But how is it in practice? Nothing like that - bottom tiers are cannon fodder - they have to stay at the back to survive - this means that top tiers are likely to be closest viable targets most of the time. 

If bottom tiers go forward, they get picked off by higher tiers, like XP pinatas actually are. All in all, bottom tiers in template system are not much more but free EXP for tops. Especially given the fact that they still are less than 50% of the whole team.The bigger half outclasses them anyway, so they can't even use strength in numbers effectively. Now factor the power creep and ever growing gap in power between the tiers and you end up in literal hell.

And there is another issue - in the old MM you had this chance of landing as a lonely bottom tier in the entire team - BUT your chance of landing at the bottom AT ALL was roughly ~35% with some variations depending on tier. With template system... You land at the bottom 70% of the time. 

IN MAJORITY of your games, you are the meat for bigger fish.

Challenge is one thing, but being thrown like a rag doll against impossible odds is not a challenge, and definitely not fun in a long run.


Edited by HidesHisFace, 27 January 2018 - 09:03 PM.


cragarion #31 Posted 27 January 2018 - 09:06 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 44832 battles
  • 2,891
  • Member since:
    07-10-2010
I find the biggest problem with World of Tanks is the people who make posts like this every week.

Long_Range_Sniper #32 Posted 27 January 2018 - 09:09 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 34556 battles
  • 9,561
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-04-2011

View Postcragarion, on 27 January 2018 - 08:06 PM, said:

I find the biggest problem with World of Tanks is the people who make posts like this every week.

 

Were you referring to a post in particular or just "this" post?



_T_1_T_4_N_0_ #33 Posted 27 January 2018 - 09:26 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35497 battles
  • 1,114
  • Member since:
    02-17-2015

View PostIgnoreAnts, on 26 January 2018 - 10:07 PM, said:

 

You are missing the point, the point is that if one team has 3 players in tier 9 tanks for example who do not have any experience and the other team has at leastt average players the game will be a roll over.

 

I don't think I am as the problem will remain in any predominant template because for us it just the same thing time and time again.
It needs to be mixed as predominant templates sucks, 5-10 & 15s with the latter being a quick queue fix for unbalanced overweight tier counts.
All singular templates will have problems especially without tank rating matching.
3-5-7 shouldn't be a predominant template as 5-10 & 15s should be there to help queue balancing and also be part of normal rotation.
There will be always be problems without any form of tank rating matching, in fact highly likely to always being problems as WG have lost a high proportion of EU gamers.
3-5-7 is a perfectly feasible template if it wasn't for so many factors now hitting a 7 year plus game, that has concentrated on new markets & ignored the old.
I am hitting games now with regularity where actually my mediocre skills has me top spot in bemusement to what I have just witnessed.

Edited by DumbNumpty, 27 January 2018 - 09:32 PM.


beercritch #34 Posted 28 January 2018 - 11:51 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 40295 battles
  • 1,631
  • Member since:
    02-15-2012

Well... for my 10p there are many things wrong with the game and the distribution of tanks in a match is right up there.

 

+/-25% RNG is my top pet peeve. I dont see why its there and i think the game would be much more tactical without it, but thats a point for another post.

 

But the current MM is clearly broken and its turning what should be a great game into a farce. Armour is irrelevant due to gold ammo, slow moving tanks cant keep up or run away as needed so most games turn into a sprint that is over in 3 or 4 minutes as the 2 teams rush to do early damage. The game seems to have developed this way because too many players dont seem to know the basic tactics so it turns into a rush for damage to gain at least some XP and avoid the dreaded bottom 5 (something else I would do away with). Any thinking man who can survive for more than 3 minutes can win the game as long as the initial onslaught takes out an even number of tanks from both sides, but usually one side soon has an advantage in numbers that is amplified to being 6 or 7 tanks up in just a few seconds and from that point on its a big ask to swing the result the other way.

 

If it were my game I would endeavour to put tanks in tier EVERY game and only use the +1 or +2 spread when there isnt enough players to make up teams, Get players fighting each other on merit and skill not on the luck of the draw. For too long this game has pandered to those who cant play and all that this has done in the long term is piss off the players who can play. Those very players who are key to making this a better game.

 

I am sure more people would play lower tier tanks if they knew their games would be in tier. I for one dont want to play my tier 4 tanks against tier 6 tanks every time I take it out. I use free XP to bypass the lower tiers as far as I can, and I am sure I am not alone in this, but I still need to start at tier 5 or 6 and those first few tanks are a nightmare. 


Edited by beercritch, 28 January 2018 - 11:55 AM.


G01ngToxicCommand0 #35 Posted 28 January 2018 - 12:45 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 37465 battles
  • 751
  • Member since:
    11-03-2011

View Postbeercritch, on 28 January 2018 - 11:51 AM, said:

Well... for my 10p there are many things wrong with the game and the distribution of tanks in a match is right up there.

 

+/-25% RNG is my top pet peeve. I dont see why its there and i think the game would be much more tactical without it, but thats a point for another post.

 

But the current MM is clearly broken and its turning what should be a great game into a farce. Armour is irrelevant due to gold ammo, slow moving tanks cant keep up or run away as needed so most games turn into a sprint that is over in 3 or 4 minutes as the 2 teams rush to do early damage. The game seems to have developed this way because too many players dont seem to know the basic tactics so it turns into a rush for damage to gain at least some XP and avoid the dreaded bottom 5 (something else I would do away with). Any thinking man who can survive for more than 3 minutes can win the game as long as the initial onslaught takes out an even number of tanks from both sides, but usually one side soon has an advantage in numbers that is amplified to being 6 or 7 tanks up in just a few seconds and from that point on its a big ask to swing the result the other way.

 

If it were my game I would endeavour to put tanks in tier EVERY game and only use the +1 or +2 spread when there isnt enough players to make up teams, Get players fighting each other on merit and skill not on the luck of the draw. For too long this game has pandered to those who cant play and all that this has done in the long term is piss off the players who can play. Those very players who are key to making this a better game.

 

I am sure more people would play lower tier tanks if they knew their games would be in tier. I for one dont want to play my tier 4 tanks against tier 6 tanks every time I take it out. I use free XP to bypass the lower tiers as far as I can, and I am sure I am not alone in this, but I still need to start at tier 5 or 6 and those first few tanks are a nightmare. 

 

The problem is that the only purpose of this game is for the players to spend time progressing through the tiers to get them to spend money on premium account and gold for converting free XP and this requires a frustrating game experience with regards to matchmaking. This is the business model of Wargaming and many other F2P game developers; they are exploiting gambling/gaming disorder psychology in order to intice their customers into spending money.

M4chu #36 Posted 28 January 2018 - 11:28 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 38345 battles
  • 58
  • Member since:
    12-22-2012

basically you say that bad players are a problem? so MM would be able to fix that by teaming based on wn8 rate alongside with tier?

I play since '12 and saw a lot of gameplay ruinned in those lost years... now they don't let arty form a platoon from garage, but during battle it is ok... so what kind of thinking do you think they have?

and aiming? what is aiming? a lost time so you cannot shot at target instantly.... or not!

they bring rng here and mock all who are saying this should work the other way...

anyway... just keep an eye of simultaneously online players and if it keeps descending then.... it's clear where the problem is... but they refuse to even taking into account...

at some point they will but it will be late...maybe too late

from my point of view: still 23 days of premium days remaining ... and after that i will go to aw... there a heavy is a heavy... game engine is solid rock... so no regrets!



M4chu #37 Posted 28 January 2018 - 11:37 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 38345 battles
  • 58
  • Member since:
    12-22-2012

View PostHidesHisFace, on 27 January 2018 - 10:01 PM, said:

Let's start off with the fact that MM in WoT was never good to begin with.

 

We had +4 MM globally and let never mention it again.

 

We had +3 MM with magical Type 59 wolfpacks rampaging through tier 5 tanks. So much "fun"!

 

We had +2 random MM that wen't through multiple abysmal phases - we had a phase with 12+ arties per team even - back in the day when arty was one-shoting stuff on regular basis. 

In the final form before these bloody templates, +2 MM was giving you reasonable even chance of landing bottom, mid or top tier, but randomness there was still off the charts - you could be a "top tier" with 12 tier X tanks, 2 tier IX and lonely poor tier VIII. Because of this, some lower tiers were virtually unplayable, like tier III that had unreasonably high chance to land as lonely bottom tier among tier V tanks. And we still had anomaly of scout MM but I digress.

 

Template system in theory solves all these problems - the principle is - 3-5-7 means that there is always plenty of bottom tiers, so they have better chances of meeting their equals and having an impact in battle.

But how is it in practice? Nothing like that - bottom tiers are cannon fodder - they have to stay at the back to survive - this means that top tiers are likely to be closest viable targets most of the time. 

If bottom tiers go forward, they get picked off by higher tiers, like XP pinatas actually are. All in all, bottom tiers in template system are not much more but free EXP for tops. Especially given the fact that they still are less than 50% of the whole team.The bigger half outclasses them anyway, so they can't even use strength in numbers effectively. Now factor the power creep and ever growing gap in power between the tiers and you end up in literal hell.

And there is another issue - in the old MM you had this chance of landing as a lonely bottom tier in the entire team - BUT your chance of landing at the bottom AT ALL was roughly ~35% with some variations depending on tier. With template system... You land at the bottom 70% of the time. 

IN MAJORITY of your games, you are the meat for bigger fish.

Challenge is one thing, but being thrown like a rag doll against impossible odds is not a challenge, and definitely not fun in a long run.

 

agree and put the new policy alongside - great alpha dmg for meds good mobility and see how they go after heavies and td... arty? is out of the game anyway... and they are saying soon a new patch! new patch for what? more meds more great alpha dmg... no more targeting weak spots, no more sniping, just push "w" and click here click there good game guys... thats all



commer #38 Posted 29 January 2018 - 12:04 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38280 battles
  • 1,995
  • Member since:
    06-14-2011
The main problem with World of tanks is the players. What do I win for the correct answer?

dimethylcadmium #39 Posted 29 January 2018 - 12:11 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 9797 battles
  • 770
  • [WGL-A] WGL-A
  • Member since:
    11-24-2017

" b-b-but it's ONLY 3 TIER X's !  GIT GUD!!!"

 

3 is all it's necessary to bulldoze the enemy team

 

Don't mind our Patton, he's a redline sniping POS who farmed damage until the last second

 

 



shane73tank #40 Posted 29 January 2018 - 02:18 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 30526 battles
  • 2,086
  • [BC-X] BC-X
  • Member since:
    03-01-2014

View PostMike_Mee, on 27 January 2018 - 06:31 PM, said:

The only players that like 3-5-7 are tier 10 players ;-)

​Seriously though, being bottom tier in 3-5-7 is ****. This primarily is aimed at tiers 6 and 8 which really struggle fighting two tiers up in general. Sure there are a few exceptions, like the Defender, the Patriot, Scorpion G.... Yeah you get the idea.....  

Are you forgetting the old mm pain where it could be 14/1 and you were the only t8 in a T10 game , how fun would that be against Maus, type5 etc, at least now there are 7 tanks that you can pen 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users