Jump to content


Matches are set up


  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

LIL_Veky #1 Posted 03 February 2018 - 07:15 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 7845 battles
  • 44
  • [-B_B] -B_B
  • Member since:
    10-31-2015

I know that this is "one of those threads" but I just had to post it. 

For a while, like many of you, I have felt that the games I play are extremely one-sided, so it gives an impression of being rigged, or set up. So I did a little experiment today; I took my favorite tier 2 sealclubber tank, the French H35, to do a little experiment. I camped in the back of the base, minimally helping my team (I would kill an enemy only if he got into our base), and waited for the result. So, in a hour a half of playing, I would win a match, and then a would lose a match. When we were winning, I didn't need to take a shot, and when we were losing, I would get rushed and completely obliterated, I tried so hard to get Kolobanov's medal defend myself, but it was almost always a case of 1 vs. 7-10, and the enemies were never too damaged so I couldn't two or three-shot them. And this pattern didn't break AT ALL. 

And then I platooned with two more H35s, camping as well, and we managed twice to win 2 times in a row, in an hour of playing. 

I wanted to post this because of those who shout "git gud" or things like that, and I think this pretty much proves that if you're not on the winning team, your contribution doesn't matter in 99% of the cases.

Thanks for reading.


Edited by LIL_Veky, 03 February 2018 - 07:18 PM.


c0keb0ttle #2 Posted 03 February 2018 - 07:29 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 18161 battles
  • 1,254
  • Member since:
    10-05-2012

If you are camping base you are hardly "contributing", no matter if you are on the "winning" or the "losing" team, are you?

 

Or are you saying that you got exactly 50% win rate in that session? I'm not sure what you are trying to prove.

 

 

 

 



Dr_ownape #3 Posted 03 February 2018 - 07:30 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 40624 battles
  • 5,144
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    03-27-2013

View PostLIL_Veky, on 03 February 2018 - 06:15 PM, said:

and I think this pretty much proves that if you're not on the winning team, your contribution doesn't matter in 99% of the cases.

 

 

How would you know? If your contributed effectively then that would result in a win and not a loss - therefore you wouldn't count that game as a loss

Sekundenkleber #4 Posted 03 February 2018 - 07:30 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 49911 battles
  • 170
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    07-01-2011
I also think that when u are not on the winning team you lose mostly.

OreH75 #5 Posted 03 February 2018 - 07:31 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 46125 battles
  • 1,743
  • [3V] 3V
  • Member since:
    05-29-2013
And how many of the battles you lost you might have won if you actually participated in the battle?

Kooallu #6 Posted 03 February 2018 - 07:36 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 40828 battles
  • 292
  • Member since:
    12-09-2013

View PostLIL_Veky, on 03 February 2018 - 08:15 PM, said:

 we managed twice to win 2 times in a row, in an hour of playing. 

 

max battle lenght 15min 1h=60min/15min=4 you win total of 4, you have 100%wr

Edited by Kooallu, 03 February 2018 - 07:37 PM.


arthurwellsley #7 Posted 03 February 2018 - 07:49 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 50497 battles
  • 2,511
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

View PostLIL_Veky, on 03 February 2018 - 06:15 PM, said:

I know that this is "one of those threads" but I just had to post it. 

For a while, like many of you, I have felt that the games I play are extremely one-sided, so it gives an impression of being rigged, or set up. So I did a little experiment today; I took my favorite tier 2 sealclubber tank, the French H35, to do a little experiment. I camped in the back of the base, minimally helping my team (I would kill an enemy only if he got into our base), and waited for the result. So, in a hour a half of playing, I would win a match, and then a would lose a match. When we were winning, I didn't need to take a shot, and when we were losing, I would get rushed and completely obliterated, I tried so hard to get Kolobanov's medal defend myself, but it was almost always a case of 1 vs. 7-10, and the enemies were never too damaged so I couldn't two or three-shot them. And this pattern didn't break AT ALL. 

And then I platooned with two more H35s, camping as well, and we managed twice to win 2 times in a row, in an hour of playing. 

I wanted to post this because of those who shout "git gud" or things like that, and I think this pretty much proves that if you're not on the winning team, your contribution doesn't matter in 99% of the cases.

Thanks for reading.

 

git gud

 

sorry I could not resist.


Edited by arthurwellsley, 03 February 2018 - 07:50 PM.


InfrequentHazard #8 Posted 03 February 2018 - 08:04 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 26719 battles
  • 124
  • Member since:
    06-22-2014
You had a platoon of tanks that are essentially immune to M2 Light autocannons?, and you managed to win two battles twice in row? Hmmmm, it is possible the odds were stacked in your favour a bit.

Jigabachi #9 Posted 03 February 2018 - 08:33 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17753 battles
  • 17,636
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011

View PostLIL_Veky, on 03 February 2018 - 07:15 PM, said:

I know that this is "one of those threads" but I just had to post it.

Nono, It's not "one of those threads". It's definitely worse.

And I don't know what makes me lose more faith in mankind; you thinking that a few matches are enough to prove the existance of a very complex mechanic within a completely chaotic and even more complex environment or your understanding of cause and effect.

 

It's definitely weekend.

 



Strappster #10 Posted 03 February 2018 - 08:34 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 23602 battles
  • 8,777
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

View PostLIL_Veky, on 03 February 2018 - 06:15 PM, said:

... I think this pretty much proves that if you're not on the winning team, your contribution doesn't matter in 99% of the cases.

 

I agree, if you're not on the winning team then you usually lose regardless of your contribution. Not sure we needed a study into this but thank you for making the effort to discover something that's so bleedin' obvious no one's thought to investigate it before.

 

Perhaps you could turn your investigatory powers onto something more challenging next, such as whether or not water is wet?



OreH75 #11 Posted 03 February 2018 - 08:41 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 46125 battles
  • 1,743
  • [3V] 3V
  • Member since:
    05-29-2013

View PostStrappster, on 03 February 2018 - 08:34 PM, said:

 

Perhaps you could turn your investigatory powers onto something more challenging next, such as whether or not water is wet?

Thats easy; Water is not wet: water is the name for a fluid that makes things wet, when its in a solid state its called ice and above 100°C it turns into steam.



unhappy_bunny #12 Posted 03 February 2018 - 08:43 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 17409 battles
  • 2,137
  • [-OC-] -OC-
  • Member since:
    08-01-2012

So, to sum it up:

 

If you sat at the back and contributed nothing and your team won, that means the battle result of a win was predetermined? No. It means that the rest of the team managed to carry the battle.

If you sat at the back and contributed nothing and your team lost, that means the battle result of a loss was predetermined? No. It means that without your contribution your team was unable to carry the battle. 

 

You cannot prove what the outcome would have been if you had played a full part, because your inaction has an effect on the battle. I the first case, the team was good enough to win without you, in the second case, you can never know if, by playing and striving for a win, whether that result would have been different. 

 

All you have proved is that you have wasted your time and possibly ruined the battle for the 14 others unlucky enough to have been in your teams. 



Homer_J #13 Posted 03 February 2018 - 08:57 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 27085 battles
  • 27,733
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostLIL_Veky, on 03 February 2018 - 06:15 PM, said:

 minimally helping my team

A normal day for you then.

 

Your stats say you make a difference in two battles out of a hundred.  So in an hour I wouldn't expect your input to statistically show up anyway.



Eaglax #14 Posted 03 February 2018 - 09:22 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 18973 battles
  • 3,481
  • Member since:
    01-12-2012
thinks he is "contributing" when he camps in the base, doing nothing and watching his team die and concludes that matches must be set up....

 

Edited

 

 

This post has been edited by the moderation team due to inflammatory content.

 


Edited by VMX, 04 February 2018 - 02:31 PM.


LIL_Veky #15 Posted 04 February 2018 - 12:56 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 7845 battles
  • 44
  • [-B_B] -B_B
  • Member since:
    10-31-2015

View PostOreH75, on 03 February 2018 - 07:31 PM, said:

And how many of the battles you lost you might have won if you actually participated in the battle?

 

Uh, zero? Cause that is the problem with steamroll battles, if I play 50 tier 2 games on Mines, and I go to the same spot every time (that being the hill), our team will either get completely stomped or we will completely stomp theirs. My point is, the result will minimally change if I participate in the hill fight or I don't. 

LIL_Veky #16 Posted 04 February 2018 - 12:57 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 7845 battles
  • 44
  • [-B_B] -B_B
  • Member since:
    10-31-2015

View PostEaglax, on 03 February 2018 - 09:22 PM, said:

thinks he is "contributing" when he camps in the base, doing nothing and watching his team die and concludes that matches must be set up....

 

Edited

 

You obviously think you can read, but you actually can't.

Edited by VMX, 04 February 2018 - 02:37 PM.


vasilinhorulezz #17 Posted 04 February 2018 - 01:45 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 21192 battles
  • 866
  • Member since:
    09-26-2014

Lost 20 IQ points reading this, also...

We really need downvote button back.



_Public_Enema_ #18 Posted 04 February 2018 - 02:07 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 793 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    04-23-2014
I really respect forum members trying to make the OP understand , but as has been shown many times previously, leaving his type to play with his own faeces wearing his shiny hat is probably best for everyones sanity.

Ferditude #19 Posted 04 February 2018 - 02:57 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 862 battles
  • 428
  • Member since:
    11-22-2016


 

 

 

View PostJigabachi, on 03 February 2018 - 08:33 PM, said:

Nono, It's not "one of those threads". It's definitely worse.

And I don't know what makes me lose more faith in mankind; you thinking that a few matches are enough to prove the existance of a very complex mechanic within a completely chaotic and even more complex environment or your understanding of cause and effect.

 

It's definitely weekend.

 

 

and after all the mm threads youve read, u still fail to understand, the complexity u refer to is.....

Player goes in team A or B!

 

Similarly as complex as the coin toss, that escape your grasp

 

 

 

alerted by mm in thread +all cants come out to offer zero advise +try to derail thread +put player off posting again. 
 


Edited by Ferditude, 05 February 2018 - 06:54 AM.


Coldspell #20 Posted 04 February 2018 - 05:43 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 18583 battles
  • 2,095
  • Member since:
    08-12-2013

View PostLIL_Veky, on 03 February 2018 - 11:56 PM, said:

 

Uh, zero? Cause that is the problem with steamroll battles, if I play 50 tier 2 games on Mines, and I go to the same spot every time (that being the hill), our team will either get completely stomped or we will completely stomp theirs. My point is, the result will minimally change if I participate in the hill fight or I don't. 

 

The reason the results will minimally change is because to be frank you are average maybe even below average if you exclude bots.

You said it yourself ''the results will minimally change if I participate in the hill fight or I don't'', you don't have the skill to impact a battle so your results are largely dependent on RNG.

If you play the game and get better you will be able to impact on a losing battle and thus win more.

Also if you are playing slow heavy idiot proof tanks a lot you will have much less of chance to have an impact on a game if you go to the wrong position early on,

 

The matchmaking isn't rigged it is completely random, the simplest reason for this is that if wargaming had a system that could calculate all the variables of player skill, tank choice, map etc... to rig matchmaking to be a steamroll either way, well to put it simply they wouldn't need to bother developing the game anymore they could just keep buying winning lottery tickets.

You can't control chance, a good player can play crap, a bad player can have a miracle, someone could disconnect... some idiot could have bought a new tank and forgotten to load ammo... the list goes on.

 

Now take your tinfoil hat off and go improve yourself.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users