Jump to content


WoT MM conspirations

matchmaking

  • Please log in to reply
80 replies to this topic

Alice_Shimada_Chan #1 Posted 10 September 2018 - 02:05 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 28988 battles
  • 428
  • Member since:
    12-09-2012

Sorry, but after having one quite a long conversation with manipulated MM conspiration theorists today, I just can't help myself not to create this topic and ask you about your opinions. It could be in offtopic I quess, but it is still related to matchmaking and wot general chat, and it is something you can see every single day. WoT as pure PVP game is sometimes really frustrating, but I dont think I have ever seen anything like this, in any other online/MMO game I played.

 

So, what do you think about these WoT conspiracy theories, and people making them. Conspirations about manipulated MM/battles are something I could understand - player gets several lost battles in a row, starts thinking something isn't right - but then it mostly evolves into even bigger conspiracies, (and gods, people are really creative) that if you want to have good winrate, good overall statistics, ... you must pay wargaming at regular basis, for prem acc. for prem. tanks, ... I even saw people making conspiracies, that if you play with only standart account, you get worse camo rating and worse rng, etc. than player with prem. acc. Cons. Theory, that good players with, I dunno, lets say 55 % winrate, or unicums/superunicums are all cheaters and hackers, paying to get good teams, this one is on top.

 

You may think it's just waste of time, trying to "look into the head" of conspiration theorists, but I am getting more and more curious about them. Trying to explain them how certain things like MM of random battles, or RNG work is also waste of time, but why are some players so convinced that their battles are manipulated by wargaming, that even when you show them facts or present logical arguments, they don't even try to think about what you just wrote them, and keep to their belief.

 

If some conspiracy theorist would read this, feel free to write your opinion, but try please to use arguments that make sense, try to convince us, post proofs, ...

 

I made this topic to be serious discussion, so avoid flaming please.


Edited by Alice_Shimada_Chan, 10 September 2018 - 02:07 AM.


OIias_of_Sunhillow #2 Posted 10 September 2018 - 04:16 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 24665 battles
  • 2,614
  • Member since:
    07-20-2011

That's the problem with conspiracy theories. They're only theories.

The mind is an incredible tool, and prone to wander the halls of cynicism and magic. Where we imagine all kinds of horrors and beautiful things.

 

 

...it's 0415, and I'm off to bed...



Hedgehog1963 #3 Posted 10 September 2018 - 04:24 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 51438 battles
  • 7,561
  • [DIRTY] DIRTY
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011

tl;dr

 



BR33K1_PAWAH #4 Posted 10 September 2018 - 05:11 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 3597 battles
  • 547
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    04-11-2018

When one is failing at some task, one start searching for something, or someone, to blame for ones own failures.

 

And once one starts to truly believe that some mysterious outside forces are preventing his success, ones loses his ability to become better at his task, thus loosing the ability to ever suceed at it.

 

- ancient Belarusian wisdom



Troubledove #5 Posted 10 September 2018 - 05:35 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 42931 battles
  • 2,367
  • [METAL] METAL
  • Member since:
    09-07-2011
Behavioristic patterns. Poke your customers with different kind of sticks and see if there is reaction. Approach this question statistically, you deff. have volume.

Of you can establish a behavioristic pattern on some people you have way to milk them. Trough statistical approach you know what is more likely to work. This doesnt need to concern every player - on large mass even hit ratio as low as 2% would be justifiable.

Try to quess players fitting roles. Cater those roles around your milkees to provide "enhanced user experience". Some will pay to win. Some will pay not-to-lose. Some will pay if they see iconic performance of individuals. Some will pay for interesting game. Poke them with sticks. See when they - if they - part their wallet.

Tune MM and RNG to faciliate these things. The behavioristic system can give "flavor" to actual server.

Now, I have said enough.

Bring me my medicine.

Edited by Troubledove, 10 September 2018 - 05:37 AM.


XxKuzkina_MatxX #6 Posted 10 September 2018 - 05:43 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 50650 battles
  • 1,834
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

View PostTroubledove, on 10 September 2018 - 06:35 AM, said:

Behavioristic patterns. Poke your customers with different kind of sticks and see if there is reaction. Approach this question statistically, you deff. have volume.

Of you can establish a behavioristic pattern on some people you have way to milk them. Trough statistical approach you know what is more likely to work. This doesnt need to concern every player - on large mass even hit ratio as low as 2% would be justifiable.

Try to quess players fitting roles. Cater those roles around your milkees to provide "enhanced user experience". Some will pay to win. Some will pay not-to-lose. Some will pay if they see iconic performance of individuals. Some will pay for interesting game. Poke them with sticks. See when they - if they - part their wallet.

Tune MM and RNG to faciliate these things. The behavioristic system can give "flavor" to actual server.

Now, I have said enough.

Bring me my medicine.

 

OMG!

Enforcer1975 #7 Posted 10 September 2018 - 06:07 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20760 battles
  • 10,875
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014
The only ones manipulating / rigging battles are players.
My proof?

*cough* T-22 medium *cough*

NUKLEAR_SLUG #8 Posted 10 September 2018 - 07:21 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 29784 battles
  • 2,409
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015

The answer is very simple. 

 

Option A: Admit that you suck.

Option B: Make up an excuse.

 

It's an online environment where your 'peer standing' is largely based, rightly or wrongly, on your ability to perform.



kaneloon #9 Posted 10 September 2018 - 07:28 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28372 battles
  • 1,731
  • [OBLIC] OBLIC
  • Member since:
    11-18-2011
Option C : it is true but impossible to prove

Wintermute_1 #10 Posted 10 September 2018 - 10:03 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 44420 battles
  • 1,616
  • Member since:
    11-25-2013
Theres a very broad range of talent at WG if they are subtly manipulating win rates while also coming up with that horror show of a mission interface.

Edited by Wintermute_1, 10 September 2018 - 10:47 AM.


CmdRatScabies #11 Posted 10 September 2018 - 10:11 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 37626 battles
  • 4,451
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015

View Postkaneloon, on 10 September 2018 - 07:28 AM, said:

Option C : it is true but impossible to prove

 

Already covered:

 

View PostNUKLEAR_SLUG, on 10 September 2018 - 07:21 AM, said:

Option B: Make up an excuse.

 



Thejagdpanther #12 Posted 10 September 2018 - 10:12 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 34669 battles
  • 4,437
  • [TKBS] TKBS
  • Member since:
    07-16-2012

There are 3 kind of match in this game;

the ones that you have to lose no matter what. (never done 4000 + dmg, 14 kills and lose? :D );

the ones that you have to win no matter what. (never done crap damage, flip over, lag, teamkilled and win?);

the ones that you fight for.

Players make the last one more rilevant with their skills (or no-skills), and the knowledge that they are in such type of match.

 

 

 



Cobra6 #13 Posted 10 September 2018 - 10:14 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16332 battles
  • 15,820
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Always remember WG directly benefits from frustrating their players *JUST* enough to have them open their wallet but not so much that they leave the game entirely.

 

Keep this in mind with everything they do and you'll be fine.

- Don't buy broken/op premiums.

- Don't skip horrible grinds with free-xp.

- Just stop playing if you have a losing streak.

- Etc.

 

All of the above are rewarding bad behavior on WG's part which you'd never want to do as you are only indirectly shanking yourself in the long run.

 

Cobra 6


Edited by Cobra6, 10 September 2018 - 10:17 AM.


malachi6 #14 Posted 10 September 2018 - 10:24 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 50211 battles
  • 3,584
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011

Most conspiracies stem from latching on to incorrect information or a distorted point of view.  They then continue due to failing to include other data as it becomes available.  In WoT for example.  The coverall patent on MM stated that the MM would have provision for the win rate to be manipulated if it were needed.  The conspiracy theorists grabbed hold of this fact and ignored all information that informed them that it was merely a proviso of the patent not the actual MM.  

 

Most accusations of botting stem from a lack of realisation that quite a few people play this game on very low end equipment with poor internet access.  The assumption is that everybody has equipment of their standard and similar internet.

 

And most accusations of cheating are based upon expectation rather than fact.  A shot did not penetrate.  Ignore packet loss or a low RNG roll and jump immediately to the assumption that someone has jiggered with tank stats.  Which leads into one of the biggest assumptions many players make about this game.  That the game is handled like Call of duty or battlefield.  The vast majority of people have no idea that this game is hosted by WG on their own servers and that all combat calculations are handled by those servers.  People assume that because of cheats and hacks in games like CSGO and its like that WoT must be the same.

 

In short, most people make assumptions and refuse to allow genuine facts to sway those assumptions or grab hold of only those facts that support their assumptions.

 

 



kaneloon #15 Posted 10 September 2018 - 10:25 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28372 battles
  • 1,731
  • [OBLIC] OBLIC
  • Member since:
    11-18-2011

@Cobra6      You forgot :

- Don't spam gold ammo

 

@malachi6  The thread was not about players hacking but WG hacking to help Fort Knox customers.


Edited by kaneloon, 10 September 2018 - 10:30 AM.


Gepard_Retardieu #16 Posted 10 September 2018 - 10:49 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 20456 battles
  • 12
  • [STRIP] STRIP
  • Member since:
    08-07-2011

RNG is the biggest source of frustration in this game

+/-25% - that is 50% spread, which is a lot

25% from 390 dmg is exactly 97,5 so the damage can vary anywhere between 293 and 488 (rounded up)

Apply the same to penetration, remember shot distribution and you have explanation for almost all weird shots, bounces, etc

This is the only "manipulation" they really need



BR33K1_PAWAH #17 Posted 10 September 2018 - 10:56 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 3597 battles
  • 547
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    04-11-2018

View PostGepard_Retardieu, on 10 September 2018 - 12:49 PM, said:

RNG is the biggest source of frustration in this game

+/-25% - that is 50% spread, which is a lot

25% from 390 dmg is exactly 97,5 so the damage can vary anywhere between 293 and 488 (rounded up)

Apply the same to penetration, remember shot distribution and you have explanation for almost all weird shots, bounces, etc

This is the only "manipulation" they really need

 

Thats also what makes you stick with this game even after 20k battles. Rng in MM and game mechanics is what makes this game so replayable.

BravelyRanAway #18 Posted 10 September 2018 - 11:11 AM

    General

  • Beta Tester
  • 22792 battles
  • 9,556
  • [H_I_T] H_I_T
  • Member since:
    12-29-2010

View PostAlice_Shimada_Chan, on 10 September 2018 - 01:05 AM, said:

Sorry, but after having one quite a long conversation with manipulated MM conspiration theorists today, 

Ask to see their collected data to back up their theory.

I'm not being flippant about asking for such data....it's been eight years, more than enough time for a pattern to be ascertained for any number of crack-pot theories. Yet, not once has anyone produced such data....not once.

There is no need for WG to manipulate individual players, that would be a very complicated system, instead WG frustrate many players at the same time by 'balancing' tanks, by making tanks with little or no weakspots, or giving their guns less pen, or making a few dud tanks in a line....all to force players to open their wallets to skip modules or tanks or to shoot gold.....it really is that simple.



TungstenHitman #19 Posted 10 September 2018 - 11:18 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 23017 battles
  • 4,185
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

View PostAlice_Shimada_Chan, on 10 September 2018 - 01:05 AM, said:

if you want to have good winrate, good overall statistics, ... you must pay wargaming at regular basis, for prem acc. for prem. tanks, ... I even saw people making conspiracies, that if you play with only standart account, you get worse camo rating and worse rng, etc. than player with prem. acc. Cons. Theory, that good players with, I dunno, lets say 55 % winrate, or unicums/superunicums are all cheaters and hackers, paying to get good teams, this one is on top.

 

Nope

 



Balc0ra #20 Posted 10 September 2018 - 11:30 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 66541 battles
  • 16,580
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostGepard_Retardieu, on 10 September 2018 - 10:49 AM, said:

RNG is the biggest source of frustration in this game

+/-25% - that is 50% spread, which is a lot

25% from 390 dmg is exactly 97,5 so the damage can vary anywhere between 293 and 488 (rounded up)

Apply the same to penetration, remember shot distribution and you have explanation for almost all weird shots, bounces, etc

This is the only "manipulation" they really need

 

We still need +25% IMO, at least on pen. Even as top tier. As some of my tier 8's in an equal tier game would have zero chance vs some of the HT's there added of late if not. To you can argue that -25% is not needed tho. And that should be -15% at the worst. 

 

As for an explanation for all the weird shots? Well if your sight is orange then yes, you take a risk with it every time. 







Also tagged with matchmaking

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users