Jump to content


Skillbased Stronghold Matchmaking

SH Stronghold SkillMM MM Advance

  • Please log in to reply
295 replies to this topic

Mettkrieger #41 Posted 12 November 2018 - 07:24 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 36554 battles
  • 514
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    01-31-2012

View PostOlch, on 12 November 2018 - 07:19 PM, said:

100% Agree with Keyhand.

 

In general i could live with a skill-MM if u would get any kind of rewards for having a high ELO. For example the ELO could work as a credit- and XP-multiplier.

The way it is now, is just annoying and demotivating.

 

Credit, XP and Industrial Ressources as well

binmaa10 #42 Posted 12 November 2018 - 07:51 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 30784 battles
  • 4,482
  • [ST0RM] ST0RM
  • Member since:
    07-19-2013
If facing better clans is really that much of a problem it would also be an option to still track ELO ratings in the background and give clans X% more boxes if they fight a clan above a certain difference treshold. With that people would still have their winrates to brag about and at the same time the rest would get some motivation to fight the bigger clans. 

All in all I think the most important thing is to find a solution which does not feel like punishment. Now you punish getting stronger. You could either reward this, or reward fighting better clans. Just find a solution where you do not punish a group of players.

laulaur #43 Posted 12 November 2018 - 08:28 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 47268 battles
  • 1,552
  • [FUS2D] FUS2D
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

Yep, WG loves to punish the good players, and keep the bad ones in the comfort area so they keep playing the game and paying for premium account and tanks.

 

As others said, skill based MM would be fine if the rewards would be scaled.

Lets take a example from sports: why do you think the best athletes get payed much more?? In SH if you become better you must fight better players, but you get the exactly same rewards as the worst players....



BlablaPaige #44 Posted 12 November 2018 - 08:30 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Clan Commander
  • 21108 battles
  • 7,658
  • [N00T] N00T
  • Member since:
    03-16-2011

Block Quote

 As others said, skill based MM would be fine if the rewards would be scaled.

 

Even with 1 millions per game, I don't want to fight the same good clan with projetto-defender-caern the whole evening, its just boring af, clan wars tier 8 exist for that 



laulaur #45 Posted 12 November 2018 - 08:34 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 47268 battles
  • 1,552
  • [FUS2D] FUS2D
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

View PostBlablaPaige, on 12 November 2018 - 07:30 PM, said:

 

Even with 1 millions per game, I don't want to fight the same good clan with projetto-defender-caern the whole evening, its just boring af, clan wars tier 8 exist for that 

 

Yeah, i agree with that. I would also rather prefer fun SH instead of try-hard boring crap that has became. :(

Edited by laulaur, 12 November 2018 - 08:35 PM.


cro001 #46 Posted 12 November 2018 - 09:01 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 30880 battles
  • 2,488
  • [GX] GX
  • Member since:
    10-21-2012
#MakeStrongholdGreatAgain

BlablaPaige #47 Posted 12 November 2018 - 09:02 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Clan Commander
  • 21108 battles
  • 7,658
  • [N00T] N00T
  • Member since:
    03-16-2011

View Postcro001, on 12 November 2018 - 09:01 PM, said:

#MakeStrongholdGreatAgain

 



arthurwellsley #48 Posted 12 November 2018 - 09:26 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 52417 battles
  • 3,268
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

1. Get rid of arty and airstrike in SH.

2. Previous SH was really nasty for weak clans when they got matched against good clans. Lets not forget that WG reacted to this.

3. The only way to promote gameplay is via rewards. Humans tend to be motivated by carrots not sticks.This does not mean good players in good clans should be rewarded for bashing weak players in weak clans. Clearly if clans with high ELO and players with high PR smash weaker clans and poorer players then the rewards should be TINY. A good clan beating a very bad clan should barely make a profit on a win, and should make a silver loss if they get turned over. With all due respect to Keyhand he is a superb player, playing in top clans. If he wants more variety for matches, fine the ELO requirements should be broadened, so that instead of regularly facing four clans, the pool increases. But only if he and his clan beat the four near them should the rewards be the same. If they crush a clan thirty places below them, then the win should give each of the players a few hundred silver profit, if the clan is fifty places below them then the profit should be a few tens of silver.

4. To really increase the player and clan pool the rewards for weaker clans and lower PR players need to be higher. If the clan beats someone above them, large profits for the team, and the top five players in a losing bad clan should also make more silver. Look at what BlablaPaige says, when he plays with them, they do not see how they have one, or that camping is bad.



Mettkrieger #49 Posted 12 November 2018 - 09:26 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 36554 battles
  • 514
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    01-31-2012

We need to attract WGs decision makers. Therefore I may post the following image. It should satisfy everyones taste:

 



cro001 #50 Posted 12 November 2018 - 09:30 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 30880 battles
  • 2,488
  • [GX] GX
  • Member since:
    10-21-2012

View PostBlablaPaige, on 12 November 2018 - 09:02 PM, said:

 

 

I see I have new signature. Thanks. 

maroar #51 Posted 12 November 2018 - 10:15 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 29713 battles
  • 2,470
  • Member since:
    10-02-2012

The only thing I really played was skirmishes.
It was my go to mode.

When I play it is still my go to mode, I just play a lot less now than I did before.

 

I stopped playing T6 skirmishes almost completely, the T3485M spam is worse than the OI camps.

T8 bouncing defenders without shooting premium ammo is almost as annoying. 10v10 T10s...

 

Nothing was changed for the good in my opinion, I would still rather play companies than skirmishes as they currently are.


Edited by maroar, 12 November 2018 - 10:16 PM.


Keyhand #52 Posted 12 November 2018 - 10:43 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 62721 battles
  • 5,696
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011

View Postarthurwellsley, on 12 November 2018 - 09:26 PM, said:

3. The only way to promote gameplay is via rewards. Humans tend to be motivated by carrots not sticks.This does not mean good players in good clans should be rewarded for bashing weak players in weak clans. Clearly if clans with high ELO and players with high PR smash weaker clans and poorer players then the rewards should be TINY. A good clan beating a very bad clan should barely make a profit on a win, and should make a silver loss if they get turned over. With all due respect to Keyhand he is a superb player, playing in top clans. If he wants more variety for matches, fine the ELO requirements should be broadened, so that instead of regularly facing four clans, the pool increases. But only if he and his clan beat the four near them should the rewards be the same. If they crush a clan thirty places below them, then the win should give each of the players a few hundred silver profit, if the clan is fifty places below them then the profit should be a few tens of silver.

 

I see your point, yet do not agree.

Why should someone be punished for being stronger?

In my opinion, that is the wrong approach.

Reversing the matchmaker to being blind about stats again, everyone would meet the same enemies in the long term thus being fair to everyone.

Also, the solution proposed by you could be easily circumvented by downrigging the ELO.


Edited by Keyhand, 12 November 2018 - 10:43 PM.


binmaa10 #53 Posted 12 November 2018 - 10:52 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 30784 battles
  • 4,482
  • [ST0RM] ST0RM
  • Member since:
    07-19-2013

View Postarthurwellsley, on 12 November 2018 - 09:26 PM, said:

1. Get rid of arty and airstrike in SH.

2. Previous SH was really nasty for weak clans when they got matched against good clans. Lets not forget that WG reacted to this.

3. The only way to promote gameplay is via rewards. Humans tend to be motivated by carrots not sticks.This does not mean good players in good clans should be rewarded for bashing weak players in weak clans. Clearly if clans with high ELO and players with high PR smash weaker clans and poorer players then the rewards should be TINY. A good clan beating a very bad clan should barely make a profit on a win, and should make a silver loss if they get turned over. With all due respect to Keyhand he is a superb player, playing in top clans. If he wants more variety for matches, fine the ELO requirements should be broadened, so that instead of regularly facing four clans, the pool increases. But only if he and his clan beat the four near them should the rewards be the same. If they crush a clan thirty places below them, then the win should give each of the players a few hundred silver profit, if the clan is fifty places below them then the profit should be a few tens of silver.

4. To really increase the player and clan pool the rewards for weaker clans and lower PR players need to be higher. If the clan beats someone above them, large profits for the team, and the top five players in a losing bad clan should also make more silver. Look at what BlablaPaige says, when he plays with them, they do not see how they have one, or that camping is bad.

 

Your point 3 is a little bit contradicting itself. Because as you say people prefer carrots over sticks. Even though you want to solve the problem with sticks for one group of players. Wouldn't it be better to turn your punishment system the other way round. To increase the prizes for playing against stronger clans? 

Then you would have the same result. Only that the worse players have more from a fight against a better clan, when they still get decent money. And just imagine how great a win will feel. (Even though its not likely even the best clan has bad performances).

Also it would not change the feeling of weak clans, as for them everything is still the same. They get crushed and its done. Just try to make a chance out of the punishment. Or in your words switch the stick to a carrot.


Edited by binmaa10, 12 November 2018 - 10:53 PM.


Norstein_Bekker #54 Posted 13 November 2018 - 12:00 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 20337 battles
  • 4,739
  • [N00T] N00T
  • Member since:
    11-22-2013
That's exactly the point. The bigger the opponent, the bigger the reward. So minor clans still get their "share".

I wouldn't mind earning the same and the minor clans earning a bit more even with a defeat, if we got rid of this MM.

Also I kinda like the Advances/Wargames system, I think the Skill-MM is perfectly designed for this mode since it is supposed to be a bit more tryharding. But as stated previously, you get nothing more when fighting the stronger/strongest over and over.

And if Advances are designed to be tryhard, then bring the fun back in Skirmishes.

Make SH Great Again.

(And why are you not all posting those feedbacks here : http://forum.worldof...0#entry16249353 ? Heh ? Is Keyhand that much more handsome than Kandly ? )

Kabine10_JesusWasDrunk #55 Posted 13 November 2018 - 12:20 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 47646 battles
  • 741
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    11-13-2011

i guess pretty much everything is said already but was too lazy to read all stuff so i just add following.

 

no matter what clan you are or what's your clan ELO for complete win in advance you get that 33k-42k boxes (no idea whats the correct number) which is same as you give same prize for premier league champion or wargamings sunday day employers football game winner. (theres clans who aint considered very good, lets just ssay like 1500wn avg, if wn even is the thing in 2018?,  but still have like 200 000 extra boxes just cos they happen to be one of the best clans from the teams in their "skill level", basicly they can make more boxes than they can produce more bonuses..

 

skill mm is about PR.. so doesnt matter if you win or lose 1000000000000000 times in a row you still play the same opponents daily. (unless youre some social clan which recruits players from all skill levels)

 

reasons above and probably earlier mentioned.. sh/advance is damn demotivating, repetative and boring on its current state.. we basicly play it cos we need do boxes but i dont think lots enjoy it tbh. theres no reward to try to be better and as we posses quiet high PR players we cant go lower either, cos ELO means nothing. maybe next option is to go play team battles and lose on purpose. i heard its good way to manipulate PR. but i dont want wait 5mins all time to play 3minutes battle.

 

 


Edited by KABINE10, 13 November 2018 - 12:23 AM.


Zorgane #56 Posted 13 November 2018 - 02:13 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 24430 battles
  • 3,119
  • [FORGE] FORGE
  • Member since:
    11-30-2013

Only common sense here. :medal:

Anyway I like the new system of advances and it definitly need a (better) skill based MM and a skill based reward maybe with ELO of the clan in advance, which can be reinitialized after a period of time (like old team ranked battle) ?

 



DorsVenabiIi #57 Posted 13 November 2018 - 02:27 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 26183 battles
  • 1,136
  • [BIBLE] BIBLE
  • Member since:
    03-31-2015
My clan has also struggled a lot due to this, It's hard being top ranked, thumps up OP :)

laulaur #58 Posted 13 November 2018 - 05:43 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 47268 battles
  • 1,552
  • [FUS2D] FUS2D
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

View Postarthurwellsley, on 12 November 2018 - 08:26 PM, said:

 

3. The only way to promote gameplay is via rewards. Humans tend to be motivated by carrots not sticks.This does not mean good players in good clans should be rewarded for bashing weak players in weak clans. Clearly if clans with high ELO and players with high PR smash weaker clans and poorer players then the rewards should be TINY. A good clan beating a very bad clan should barely make a profit on a win, and should make a silver loss if they get turned over. With all due respect to Keyhand he is a superb player, playing in top clans. If he wants more variety for matches, fine the ELO requirements should be broadened, so that instead of regularly facing four clans, the pool increases. But only if he and his clan beat the four near them should the rewards be the same. If they crush a clan thirty places below them, then the win should give each of the players a few hundred silver profit, if the clan is fifty places below them then the profit should be a few tens of silver.

4. To really increase the player and clan pool the rewards for weaker clans and lower PR players need to be higher. If the clan beats someone above them, large profits for the team, and the top five players in a losing bad clan should also make more silver. Look at what BlablaPaige says, when he plays with them, they do not see how they have one, or that camping is bad.

 

No offense but this is complete [edited]...

You say that humans get motivated by carrots and not sticks, but you also say that if you are good in something you should be rewarded less, just for being good....:facepalm:

 

Toy propose that stronger clans get tiny rewards for beating baddies, that is a stick.

How about bad clans getting huge rewards for beating strong clans? That is a carrot, my friend...

 

You say that bad clans/players should be protected from not being roflstomped by good players/clans (exactly what WG does now) so they not cry too much. What difference makes for them if they lose or win?

You know what every single bad player that throws away games in randoms says: ''i play just for fun bro''.... So for them it should not matter if they win or lose...

 

 

Also your 'solution' is really bad and very easy to exploit.

Lets say that my rating is high now, and i get tiny rewards because of that. I can do SH with bad legionaires, play bad, lower the ELO of the clan.  After i lowered the rating, i can activate reserves, make a good team and get back the regular rewards from beating everyone because we are 'weak'. Rinse and repeat.

 

Differentiating the rewards based on skill would not work, no matter how you try to implement it. Just bring back old 'random' mode of mm and everything is fine.

 

 


Edited by laulaur, 13 November 2018 - 06:04 AM.


RNGD #59 Posted 13 November 2018 - 07:41 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 49497 battles
  • 307
  • [GPIGS] GPIGS
  • Member since:
    04-23-2011

View PostKeyhand, on 12 November 2018 - 03:05 PM, said:

Hey Guys!

 

In february of 2017, WG implemented a new matchmaking system for the stronghold mode, one that is supposed to match fairly equal enemies against each other.

Now this may sound like a worthwhile endeavour, right? Matching opponents of roughly equal skill sounds fair at first glance after all.

However, I and many other players have noticed a lot of irritating and stressful changes taking place within this supposedly "fair" new matchmaking, leading us to play far less Stronghold than before the changes.

Following this brief introduction, I will list the negative changes that SkillMM has brought us as the playerbase and explain thoroughly why it should not stay the way it is.

 

1. Queue Times

 

When you start up the game, your first and foremost goal is to play of course. A matchmaker trying to find teams of roughly equal skill will naturally take longer to find those opponents in an environment with a finite amount of teams.

This leads to instances of extreme queue time for many players and frustration when you have Clanboosters running.

Example:

As you can see here, we spent over 12 minutes in the queue before we decided to halt it and go seperate ways since waiting longer for a game than the game would take at maximum certainly is not what one would consider to be very entertaining at all (and yes, there were other teams "playing" at the time)

 

 

2.  The pressure to pick good tanks

 

Some of you might remember - Strongholds did not always consist of teams picking Type 64s, T34-85Ms, Defenders, Patriots, Progettos, Skorpion Gs, WZ 5As, SuperConqs, 907s and other Metatanks.

It used to be a fun experience in which you would be able to play with almost any setup in a chilled atmosphere if you chose to do so.

I fondly remember HE-only setups with T49s and O-HO's as well as nationsetups with only autoloaders for the french for example.

Nowadays, stuff like that is simply not possible any more. Sure you can pick tanks like that, but you will get instarekt by an enemy team with roughly your skill able to pwn you with their serious setup which pretty quickly makes you not do that any more.

 

 

3. The pressure to play serious

 

This is another aspect of the aforementioned argument.

In an environment matching you with opponents of equal skill and the goal to win, naturally you have to play well to achieve victory.

This leaves little to no room for the stuff that you meet up with your buddies on the internet for - the fun.

I remember some evenings which are amongst the most fun I ever experienced in this game - playing Strongholds until 4 or 5 in the morning slowly sipping away at whatever one chose to drink - bam - gone.

When you have to try your very best in every game to overcome the opposing team, the relaxed shenanigans very quickly die off and a concentrated and oftentimes toxic atmosphere takes its place.

Now I the way I understand this, Wargaming created Clans and all related teambased battlemodes for Player retention since you will be less likely to leave the game when you have buddies online that you wanna hear and talk to and experience fun stuff with together. When all of this happens in a very tense environment every evening, people will soon stop appreciating the company of each other and stop playing or move on to other games which offer a different atmosphere - at least that is my experience.

 

 

4. The predetermined Winrate for most Clans in the long run is unfair

 

In an environment where the matchmaker tries to match you up against teams of equal skill, naturally, most clans will have a predetermined winrate of slightly below 50% due to the draws inevitably happening.

This means, that no matter how good the players you recruit are or how much you train to get better or how well you play together, the matchmaker will always try to find a team matching your current level.

You just improved your gameplay? Here, have stronger opponents as a "reward" and win just as much as before - thus also not being rewarded with more credits and combat XP as you would be in random battles.

 

 

5. The repetitive nature of enemies

 

In an environment of limited opponents with roughly your Skill Level, you tend to naturally meet the same enemies more often.

Not only does this repetitiveness of getting matched against the same enemies again and again become very boring after a while, it also is a source of great frustration when you have already encountered certain camping tactics in advances before and know exactly what will happen should you reach a certain map.

To emphasize this point, I will now list the enemies that my current clan has met in advances in the timeframe of 18th of october till 3rd of november - after this, activity went down due to supercup etc.

CSA, GX, NOMI, QSF (Pog) , GX, CSA, NOMI, NERVA, ANUBI, CSA, FEST, NOMI, GX, CSA, FEST, NOMI, FEST, 5TAR5, CSA

This means that out of the last 20 advances discarding 4 Clans we only met once, there was a choice of 4 (!) opponents to meet.

Very repetitive and not very engaging after a while.

 

 

 

All of the abovementioned points have lead to a noticeable decrease in stronghold activity for all tiers, except Tier X where the advances mode basically killed off the Tier 10 skirmishes by itself.

Also, Clans which focused on playing Strongholds in a relaxed manner have all but died out which is - from my point of view - a very sad thing.

 

I would like you guys to take a few seconds (was gonna write minutes but this is the internet, lol) and think about how you have experienced the changes to the Stronghold mode and leave feedback about my thoughts.

Should you have more points to add or even be able to correct me on some of my assumptions I will gladly revise my post and edit it where needed.

 

Let's try to bring Strongholds back to the chillaxed fun they used to be!

 

Cheers and thanks for reading, Keyhand :izmena:

 

 

Edits:

 

Props to Binma for this one:

The Skill MM is also bad for clans which have a huge variety in their playerskill. As Clans tend to be more than just the 7-15 players needed for a battle, you can also have different players. So a hypothetical team of the best players of a clan playing one day will set the ceiling higher for a team of the worst players the following day. Which therefore does not encourage the worse players to play. I hope I do not need to explain in how many ways this is bad for clans and players, as it decimates the potential playerbase and maybe excludes some nice guys from playing skirmishes in your clan.

It's also bad for new FCs trying to train for the same reasons, plus that it is hard for them to see progress.

 

You are 100% right. It is even more retarded in mid skilled clans like the one I am in. You play to improve, you improve to a certain level and then you get punished thrown to higher elo. Then you need to have a period of losses again so you can drop your elo, only to tryhard even more. Eventually people just wont join. It was far better before. You had the random "omg its FAAAMEE" now and then, but who cares. The more rules you throw in the system, the more retarded it gets.

Qomewaon #60 Posted 13 November 2018 - 09:01 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 13052 battles
  • 2,665
  • [NOMI] NOMI
  • Member since:
    06-25-2011
I am 200% agreeing with what Keyhand said in this topic.





Also tagged with SH, Stronghold, SkillMM, MM, Advance

4 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users