Jump to content


Preferential Matchmaking Vehicles in Update 1.2


  • Please log in to reply
244 replies to this topic

Akathis #41 Posted 04 October 2018 - 04:10 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 75158 battles
  • 1,481
  • Member since:
    12-02-2012

View PostHomer_J, on 04 October 2018 - 04:10 PM, said:

 

No it is not.  They dropped the plans to change it.

 

Yes, it is. In the present article they repeat that they will revisit the MM.

Max_Calibre #42 Posted 04 October 2018 - 04:13 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 20631 battles
  • 904
  • [T-OG] T-OG
  • Member since:
    02-03-2014

View PostArchaean, on 04 October 2018 - 02:18 PM, said:

You remind me of my little brother. He argues very similarly.

 

Oh and when was it mentioned that pref mm tanks should have a 50 % chance of being top tier? Going by your train of thought it would be even more than 50% but either way that was never the case. We don't know how the match making system matches tanks, what variables are being used in the process of matching tanks. For example take tank A and tank B, both are T9 tanks but tank A is a heavy tank and tank B is a light tank. Both tanks play differently and have different amount of impact on the game. Thus one can assume that the match making will take this "variable" into consideration and match accordingly.

But then again it could be like you hinted that if tanks are of same tier that they will be regarded as the same.

 

Whatever the case. Don't blame wargaming because of your betrayed expectations. 

 

dude!

SALT is SALT eh?

Foch must be so proud of your big SALT

 

ASK him Foch what he thinks? and if he sides with you trolling? or what I printed which is the truth?

 

dude ………..



PurpleSnail #43 Posted 04 October 2018 - 04:13 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 41424 battles
  • 10
  • Member since:
    12-31-2012

186 mm pen for the WZ!

Yes, that will make that tank competitive against T10 tanks for sure!

 

You need to have IQ under 70, to get into the developper team, or it's just coincidence?



Yaccay #44 Posted 04 October 2018 - 04:15 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 32831 battles
  • 1,994
  • [4TL] 4TL
  • Member since:
    11-21-2012

Too little.

Yet, any improvement helps.

 

I would like to know how WG will solve this problem at the end (removing pMM and buffing tanks). And I hope it will happen sooner.

15:16 Added after 0 minutes

View PostPurpleSnail, on 04 October 2018 - 04:13 PM, said:

186 mm pen for the WZ!

Yes, that will make that tank competitive against T10 tanks for sure!

 

You need to have IQ under 70, to get into the developper team, or it's just coincidence?

 

pref MM will stay.

Homer_J #45 Posted 04 October 2018 - 04:19 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 28771 battles
  • 30,068
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostAkathis, on 04 October 2018 - 04:10 PM, said:

 

Yes, it is. In the present article they repeat that they will revisit the MM.

Lets try again.

 

View PostHomer_J, on 04 October 2018 - 04:10 PM, said:

 

Quote

Goal: Improve the experience for preferential tanks while keeping the preferential matchmaking parameter and their unique characteristics intact.

 

From...

 

This time I made it bold and underlined it.  Would you like it highlighting as well?
15:20 Added after 1 minute

View PostPurpleSnail, on 04 October 2018 - 04:13 PM, said:

186 mm pen for the WZ!

Yes, that will make that tank competitive against T10 tanks for sure!

 

You need to have IQ under 70, to get into the developper team, or it's just coincidence?

 

Care to share your IQ because you seem to have missed that they won't meet tier X.

TacticusMK2 #46 Posted 04 October 2018 - 04:30 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 16824 battles
  • 625
  • [DUAL] DUAL
  • Member since:
    02-09-2014
Pref MM will stay. I think the sh**storm it would cause if they removed it would be just too much to handle.

I bought a lot of these tanks especially because they have preferred MM so I can skill up crew without dealing with Obj 286 4, Obj 430U's and other OP beyond imagination tanks. (That usually are Russian).

Simona2k #47 Posted 04 October 2018 - 04:38 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 1739 battles
  • 296
  • [GGLT] GGLT
  • Member since:
    10-01-2017
Good job

Akathis #48 Posted 04 October 2018 - 04:49 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 75158 battles
  • 1,481
  • Member since:
    12-02-2012

View PostHomer_J, on 04 October 2018 - 04:19 PM, said:

Lets try again.

Gooby pls... read again the articles, and try to understand them properly. :facepalm:

blindhai #49 Posted 04 October 2018 - 04:49 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 24757 battles
  • 439
  • [BFFC] BFFC
  • Member since:
    06-02-2011
If prefMM stays the same, then this is ok. Much needed improvements though!

Zockmock #50 Posted 04 October 2018 - 04:50 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 7062 battles
  • 80
  • Member since:
    07-18-2010

View PostHomer_J, on 04 October 2018 - 03:19 PM, said:

Lets try again.

 

 

This time I made it bold and underlined it.  Would you like it highlighting as well?
15:20 Added after 1 minute

 

Care to share your IQ because you seem to have missed that they won't meet tier X.

 

I think he is talking about the normal MM and not the preferential matchmaking. And yes I read that they will change stuff to normal MM too.

I mean they need to change 3-5-7, +2/-2 and Arty for the game to have a future. Just my 2 cents.

 

@topic:

Too little too less. And 185 Pen is pretty much useless. But let's see and then point our fingers to wg again with the words "told you".



Ginnungagap #51 Posted 04 October 2018 - 04:50 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 10853 battles
  • 23
  • [OXIDE] OXIDE
  • Member since:
    04-15-2011

View PostSharpBlue, on 04 October 2018 - 01:17 PM, said:

Nice changes, I think...

 

More details about the vague "improved frontal armour?"

 

View PostKandly, on 04 October 2018 - 01:44 PM, said:

 

:) Hey! I asked around to see if there's more info on this.

 

View PostRiidzhA, on 04 October 2018 - 01:50 PM, said:

 

There was detailed post in https://worldoftanks.eu/ some time ago, but i cant find it now. But there is - https://thearmoredpa...al-matchmaking/ - scroll down and there You can see armor changes.

 

Any more info on this? :) i'm pretty sure supertest numbers are a little bit outdated. Would be cool 2 see what they are actually planing to put in? Also there is nothing about the type59 armor in the super test news. Well as far as i can see, but on the WG post today it also said that the type59 would get a frontal armor buff :medal:

tesha032 #52 Posted 04 October 2018 - 04:59 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 52995 battles
  • 75
  • [KRV] KRV
  • Member since:
    02-24-2013
For the same cost, (1025 silver) Defender and 252U have 50 more damage per shell, and incredible 39mm of penetration more per standard shell when compared to an IS-6. What exactly do you think this will change? IS-6 is obsolete, either buff it or just remove it, stop taking a p*** over its corpse. Have some respect and give it at least a proper retirement. I'll just repeat myself - this isn't a buff, this is an insult.

hasicro #53 Posted 04 October 2018 - 05:05 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 38055 battles
  • 23
  • Member since:
    02-19-2011

Last time I checked the 112 already has .44 dispersion, so how exactly is it a 0.02 change? I know it's a mistake, that's not why I'm here. The "game changing" buff of 11mm pen is why I'm here. How exactly am I supposed to pen IS-3 with 186mm? Bottom plate of an IS-3 (if not angling) is 186mm thick, which means I'm a 50-50 to make the shot (pray to rng gods), how exactly does that fix my issue where it's necessary to shoot HEAT all the time. Don't even get me started on how to pen a defender without HEAT (haters will say shoot the hatch, but how often will 0.42 even hit at close range perfectly to pen as you aim up in them).

Everyone understands that the defender is overpowered, so I can take an even better example, can you pen an IS-6 frontally with 186mm? Answer is your an 50-50, solution load HEAT.

Can you pen an 112 frontally? Yet again the answer is no, solution load HEAT.

Look, I'm not asking for 225mm like the IS-3 has, just something that doesn't need gold to play, using gold makes you lose hard earned credits, you won't end in the red, but what's the point of having a premium tier 8 that earns 10k per game? Give them a proper buff, or better yet, don't even touch them and drop the 3/5/7 format as it's the only thing to blame for all of our problems. I've been playing all the way since the CB (it says my acc was made 25.04.2011), in all that time game took an giant leap forward, one thing stands as an huge mistake and that's the 3/5/7 format. Sure before you could get silly mm and get your tier 5 scout in a tier 10 game, but would you be mad? Hell no, you'd laugh your [edited]off and play a great game (my highest exp game 2874 is in an ELC amx in a tier 10 match), but now it's an battle of the top tiers, if 1 or 2 top tiers on your team suck you'll lose the match no matter what you do.

It's time to say you made an mistake and drop the format, make world of tanks great again! (you made me quote trump :facepalm:)


Edited by hasicro, 04 October 2018 - 05:05 PM.


Captain_Tickle #54 Posted 04 October 2018 - 05:07 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 22176 battles
  • 114
  • Member since:
    11-21-2016

"MM is very difficult and we want to make sure we get it 100% correct before implementing changes" (paraphrasing, but basically that) I'm sorry but 3-6 months to make any matchmaking changes whatsoever is ludicrous. And I just don't believe WG when they say they can't make any changes without a complete overhaul/rewrite. It feels to me like WG don't want to make any changes for now, as with the introduction of the 2nd front campaigns, they know people will be desperate to progress to the Obj 279, and they'd like as much gold spammed and money spent during that time as possible.  

 

Yes, I've become quite jaded. Maybe time for a break until the Christmas event, when last time it was actually quite fun to play, and I was happy to pay for a Premium account.

 

 



Azgabast #55 Posted 04 October 2018 - 05:08 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 18745 battles
  • 153
  • Member since:
    08-19-2012

Ohh sweet Type-59, even getting a pen buff, I wonder how/why the armour needs improving though.

I'm also quite interested in playing the SuperP. in the new formula. Damn.. it will have more pen than T32, this doesn't feel right..

T-34-3 might look awesome with that gun depression buff. I did not expect accuracy buff too, this should help ( I am using gld + vstabs on it..)

 

Can't say much for the others, but they should be a bit more playable now. (except Jp88, I traded that thing in.. big box with no camo or armor and a peashooter is a nono for me.. hope the ones that like it will enjoy though!)


Edited by Azgabast, 04 October 2018 - 05:10 PM.


wsatnutter #56 Posted 04 October 2018 - 05:09 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Beta Tester
  • 24959 battles
  • 7,590
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    08-25-2010
lets see shall we

LMLM20 #57 Posted 04 October 2018 - 05:12 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 13066 battles
  • 50
  • [RYNO] RYNO
  • Member since:
    08-18-2013

In general is good to see some nice improvements on that preferential premium vehicles, but some dispersions are still a little high on my opinion. Now the game will have more of that vehicles on the battlefield.

I hope you solve the matchmaking problem fast, because you must not forget that many players that dont have many free experience cannot unlock certain modules and many times there're players playing tier VIII stock vehicles that haven't got a chance facing tier Xs and this matchmaker makes a tier VIII face tiers X many times.

I think you should make a change on the matchmaking when playing with stock tanks. For example, when playing with IS-3 and with a stock gun on it, having more tier VI-VIII battles, with a gun like the 122 mm D-25T (tier VIII gun), having more tier VII-IX battles and with the last gun like the 122 mm BL-9 (tier IX gun), having more tier VIII-X battles. That all still without catching tiers X all the time, because noone likes facing +2 tiers all the time and the matchmaker should make more single tier X battles to keep them busy.


Edited by LMLM20, 04 October 2018 - 05:13 PM.


mujex #58 Posted 04 October 2018 - 05:20 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 34232 battles
  • 138
  • Member since:
    05-01-2013

How F.U.C.K.I.N.G. hard is it to admit 3-5-7 was a gigantic mistake? Revert to old MM and problem is solved, at least until you figure out something better. I've been playing this game since 2011, but I've stopped playing for the past two months. I just can't bring myself to play with 3-5-7.



Aleksey_K #59 Posted 04 October 2018 - 05:24 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 31170 battles
  • 92
  • [ANIML] ANIML
  • Member since:
    11-24-2011

View Postmujex, on 04 October 2018 - 06:20 PM, said:

How F.U.C.K.I.N.G. hard is it to admit 3-5-7 was a gigantic mistake? Revert to old MM and problem is solved, at least until you figure out something better. I've been playing this game since 2011, but I've stopped playing for the past two months. I just can't bring myself to play with 3-5-7.

 

Dude they know very well - but 3-5-7 is good for company wallet .. :) for this they will not change /except if they have critical low profit/

mujex #60 Posted 04 October 2018 - 05:24 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 34232 battles
  • 138
  • Member since:
    05-01-2013

View Posthasicro, on 04 October 2018 - 04:05 PM, said:

Last time I checked the 112 already has .44 dispersion, so how exactly is it a 0.02 change? I know it's a mistake, that's not why I'm here. The "game changing" buff of 11mm pen is why I'm here. How exactly am I supposed to pen IS-3 with 186mm? Bottom plate of an IS-3 (if not angling) is 186mm thick, which means I'm a 50-50 to make the shot (pray to rng gods), how exactly does that fix my issue where it's necessary to shoot HEAT all the time. Don't even get me started on how to pen a defender without HEAT (haters will say shoot the hatch, but how often will 0.42 even hit at close range perfectly to pen as you aim up in them).

Everyone understands that the defender is overpowered, so I can take an even better example, can you pen an IS-6 frontally with 186mm? Answer is your an 50-50, solution load HEAT.

Can you pen an 112 frontally? Yet again the answer is no, solution load HEAT.

Look, I'm not asking for 225mm like the IS-3 has, just something that doesn't need gold to play, using gold makes you lose hard earned credits, you won't end in the red, but what's the point of having a premium tier 8 that earns 10k per game? Give them a proper buff, or better yet, don't even touch them and drop the 3/5/7 format as it's the only thing to blame for all of our problems. I've been playing all the way since the CB (it says my acc was made 25.04.2011), in all that time game took an giant leap forward, one thing stands as an huge mistake and that's the 3/5/7 format. Sure before you could get silly mm and get your tier 5 scout in a tier 10 game, but would you be mad? Hell no, you'd laugh your [edited]off and play a great game (my highest exp game 2874 is in an ELC amx in a tier 10 match), but now it's an battle of the top tiers, if 1 or 2 top tiers on your team suck you'll lose the match no matter what you do.

It's time to say you made an mistake and drop the format, make world of tanks great again! (you made me quote trump :facepalm:)

 

Simple answer is you don't. If you can't pen load HEAT. But that wouldn't be a problem if pref MM tanks would meat more tier 7 and 6 tanks, which you use to before thr33 - f1v3 - s3v3n ;d
16:26 Added after 1 minute

View PostAleksey_K, on 04 October 2018 - 04:24 PM, said:

 

Dude they know very well - but 3-5-7 is good for company wallet .. :) for this they will not change /except if they have critical low profit/

 

Yes yes, but why not admit it to their community? Just admit you dun goofed and maybe gain a modicum of respect from us.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users