Jump to content


Punished for playing in platoons


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

Lagochillus #1 Posted 05 February 2019 - 04:40 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 24376 battles
  • 17
  • [KILTA] KILTA
  • Member since:
    05-24-2012

Hey, has anyone else noticed this thing? 

 

You play solo: Your teams are nice, you get mostly good games even if you lose, you manage to do stuff and games arent always turbolose or turbowin. But then your friend from clan wants to platoon with you, the downhill starts: You get people with +50k games and 200 wn8, you get a massive turbolose streak where your team manages somehow to lose whole map control in first minute. 

 

For example: I was playing alone today and managed to 2 mark my AMX 30, even if we managed to lose, games where ending like 13-15 or something like that, so it was nice battle even if you lost. I managed to dish out like 3-5k damage in every battle and got nice assist damage also from tracking enemies or spotting them. Then my friend from clan wanted to platoon with me to do these platoon missions. I accepted and noticed that it was a fatal mistake. Instant losing streak, lemming trains every game, 15-2 games in 2-3 minutes. My friend has XVM and noticed that many of team mates were 20-50k games with wn8 less than 500 and we played tier 9-10 (I dont give a [edited]about wn8, but when your win ratio in 50k games is under 45% and wg rating under 3k, it usually means the person is too dumb to learn the game even to be average.) 

 

I also notice, that when you play in platoon, the arty count is increased to 3 or 2 artys every single game. When I played solo, I had many wonderful games without clickers, or had one clicker per team. After platooning every game 2-3 sky shits. 

 

Now I am just wondering, if this is a real mechanic that punishes players for playing in platoons? (Like if the matchmaker looks that you're in platoon so it gives you more artillery and crappier teams) or why does this happen? Atleast after this day Im not platooning anymore with anyone, unless its end of game and its required for BIA or curcial contribution. Please feel free to share your experiences about this. 

 



Kartoshkaya #2 Posted 05 February 2019 - 04:44 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 24809 battles
  • 449
  • Member since:
    01-01-2015
The only punishment i've noticed is you're less likely to be top tier. Wich is technically understable with the 3 5 7.

TheDrownedApe #3 Posted 05 February 2019 - 04:45 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 46122 battles
  • 5,823
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    03-27-2013
No, what nonsense. The only difference is a higher chance to get bottom tier

Edited by TheDrownedApe, 05 February 2019 - 04:45 PM.


NUKLEAR_SLUG #4 Posted 05 February 2019 - 04:48 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 31208 battles
  • 3,013
  • [FISHY] FISHY
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015
Nope, it's your imagination.

Lagochillus #5 Posted 05 February 2019 - 04:49 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 24376 battles
  • 17
  • [KILTA] KILTA
  • Member since:
    05-24-2012

View PostKartoshkaya, on 05 February 2019 - 03:44 PM, said:

The only punishment i've noticed is you're less likely to be top tier. Wich is technically understable with the 3 5 7.

 

Yeah, thats something I am willing to accept. And usually thats why I play tier 10s or 9s in platoon.

View PostTheDrownedApe, on 05 February 2019 - 03:45 PM, said:

No, what nonsense. The only difference is a higher chance to get bottom tier

 

Im aware of that. But how can someone explain it, that our games started going into total downhill after platooning up? We both had nice games and thats why we choose to platoon up, to do those missions and have good time. But no. I would rather have needles under my toe nails and kick a stone wall than have that experience again. It was really irritating, completly useless team mates that gets mowed down in 2 minutes. Usually leaving me and my platoon mate to be last alive, because apparently only we knew how to relocate if enemy is pushing with too big force.

wsatnutter #6 Posted 05 February 2019 - 04:50 PM

    General

  • Beta Tester
  • 25821 battles
  • 8,663
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    08-25-2010
platoons don't get pumiced they get les fav matchmaking which is understandable in some cases

Renesco #7 Posted 05 February 2019 - 04:53 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 22887 battles
  • 583
  • [SOBAD] SOBAD
  • Member since:
    10-08-2010
I've noticed it, I play with a friend a few nights a week, we have a 3-loss rule where if we lose 3 games in a row we quit for the day. Over 4 days we played like 15 or 16 games because it was like 1 win followed by 3 losses every time. Then I'd play by myself and get 5 or 6 wins in a row.

NUKLEAR_SLUG #8 Posted 05 February 2019 - 04:56 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 31208 battles
  • 3,013
  • [FISHY] FISHY
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015
There's nothing to explain, there's no mechanic to give you bad teams if you platoon.

HassenderZerhacker #9 Posted 05 February 2019 - 07:15 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 28998 battles
  • 2,756
  • [1DPG] 1DPG
  • Member since:
    09-09-2015

View PostNUKLEAR_SLUG, on 05 February 2019 - 04:56 PM, said:

There's nothing to explain, there's no mechanic to give you bad teams if you platoon.

 

yet another bold, unsubstantiated claim.

akaitora #10 Posted 05 February 2019 - 08:17 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 17372 battles
  • 189
  • [-RLD-] -RLD-
  • Member since:
    03-25-2014
above average players can easily achieve 65% WR in a 3 man platoon. We really don't need better odds for platooning. If anything you could think about penalizing platoons further

Rhym #11 Posted 06 February 2019 - 06:39 AM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 6260 battles
  • 101
  • [GWOF] GWOF
  • Member since:
    09-05-2010

View PostHassenderZerhacker, on 05 February 2019 - 07:15 PM, said:

 

yet another bold, unsubstantiated claim.

 

You understand the burden of proof is on the other side right? J/k I know you don't. These wild conspiracy theories are, lets call them highly implausible to be diplomatic, and it's your job to prove they are true, not the other way around.

 

The "no top tier in platoons in 3-5-7" can suck it however. Maybe I want to play with my friends without getting punished? It is really the one thing that is going to kill this game for me.


Edited by Rhym, 06 February 2019 - 06:40 AM.


HassenderZerhacker #12 Posted 06 February 2019 - 10:41 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 28998 battles
  • 2,756
  • [1DPG] 1DPG
  • Member since:
    09-09-2015

View PostRhym, on 06 February 2019 - 06:39 AM, said:

You understand the burden of proof is on the other side right? J/k I know you don't. These wild conspiracy theories are, lets call them highly implausible to be diplomatic, and it's your job to prove they are true, not the other way around.

 

The "no top tier in platoons in 3-5-7" can suck it however. Maybe I want to play with my friends without getting punished? It is really the one thing that is going to kill this game for me.

 

I consider claims on both sides of the spectrum require proof, I have several reasons for that:

the first reason is that WG has a patent about game rigging for customer retention. it's not a proof that they are using it right now, but its existence demonstrates that it's possible and that WG at some point has been thinking about it.

second reason is because I am a F2P player and I get statistically teams which are weaker than the enemy. the average is around 48-49% measured by WN8. this is especially visible at tier 10.

 

already that statement alone "WG made this patent but is not using it now" requires proof.



Dorander #13 Posted 06 February 2019 - 11:44 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 18688 battles
  • 3,608
  • Member since:
    05-07-2012

View PostLagochillus, on 05 February 2019 - 03:49 PM, said:

Im aware of that. But how can someone explain it, that our games started going into total downhill after platooning up? We both had nice games and thats why we choose to platoon up, to do those missions and have good time. But no. I would rather have needles under my toe nails and kick a stone wall than have that experience again. It was really irritating, completly useless team mates that gets mowed down in 2 minutes. Usually leaving me and my platoon mate to be last alive, because apparently only we knew how to relocate if enemy is pushing with too big force.

 

I suspect it has nothing to do with the fact that you platooned, you witnessed a very common effect called "regression to the mean", tried to find a solution afterwards and assumed it must be because of that one thing you changed.

 

You describe that before you platooned you had noticably nice games, you did a lot of damage/assist and you saw maybe one or even no artillery. Now does that sound like World of Tanks on average to you?

 

If we look at your profile we see that your average damage per game is a little over 1100 and your assist a little under 400. This means that even if you combined these values, even the bottom value of the 3k-5k range is twice your average performance. We also know that artillery has a prevalence of about 10% on average, so we can expect to see 1.5 artillery per match, in other words 1 or 2 artillery. Not 0 or 1. This percentage by the way is a little higher in the top tiers, a little lower in tier 6-8.

 

So before your losing streak, you were on a winning streak. That wasn't the normal situation, it wasn't even close to an average situation. So obviously at some point this streak is going to end and you're going to have worse games. There are also going to be games fully on the other side of the spectrum, else your average values would be different. So nothing special happened, your luck simply ran out, and this would've happened whether or not you and your buddy had platooned. It would've been exceedingly improbable that you had kept getting good teams and few artillery games.

 

The question of whether or not this had anything to do with platooning is as valid as asking whether or not your earlier better results have to do with playing solo, that the game has a mechanic which benefits solo players. Given the amount of solo games we've all played, this seems silly, we'd immediately point out that we get plenty bad teams and battles with 2 or even 3 artillery when playing solo, this is a common occurrence. When we play solo, we fully expect this to happen. So we should also expect that this'd happen when platooning.

 

 

View PostHassenderZerhacker, on 06 February 2019 - 09:41 AM, said:

the first reason is that WG has a patent about game rigging for customer retention. it's not a proof that they are using it right now, but its existence demonstrates that it's possible and that WG at some point has been thinking about it.

second reason is because I am a F2P player and I get statistically teams which are weaker than the enemy. the average is around 48-49% measured by WN8. this is especially visible at tier 10.

 

These dead horses again? Wargaming has no patent that describes any of the effects written in this thread, or any other thread about MM rigging for that matter. You don't understand what's in the patent, which describes battle levels, a term completely unrelated to team composition, winrates or PR.

 

That second statement is great, you can prove that easily! Just run your replays through Baldrickk's analyser program and everyone will be able to witness objective evidence. Even better, you must have done this already since you've seen it, so please share. We'll ignore for the time being the counter-evidence: that people who pay don't have statistically better outcomes which is what you'd expect if they consistently got better teams, or that someone did a full free to play experiment grinding a line to tier X to see if paying was required to be a unicum (it wasn't).



HassenderZerhacker #14 Posted 06 February 2019 - 12:27 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 28998 battles
  • 2,756
  • [1DPG] 1DPG
  • Member since:
    09-09-2015

View PostDorander, on 06 February 2019 - 11:44 AM, said:

These dead horses again? Wargaming has no patent that describes any of the effects written in this thread, or any other thread about MM rigging for that matter. You don't understand what's in the patent, which describes battle levels, a term completely unrelated to team composition, winrates or PR.

 

That second statement is great, you can prove that easily! Just run your replays through Baldrickk's analyser program and everyone will be able to witness objective evidence. Even better, you must have done this already since you've seen it, so please share. We'll ignore for the time being the counter-evidence: that people who pay don't have statistically better outcomes which is what you'd expect if they consistently got better teams, or that someone did a full free to play experiment grinding a line to tier X to see if paying was required to be a unicum (it wasn't).

 

1- read my line again. I didn't say they are using the patent now. I say WG gave it serious thought. That *FACT* alone requires any statement towards "there is no rigging in this game" to be backed by proof.

 

2- I did run it through Baldrickk's tool and it did show that indeed my battles are unbalanced in a statistically significant way. search the thread, you will find my results.



OneSock #15 Posted 06 February 2019 - 01:24 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 36850 battles
  • 1,734
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    06-06-2011

It's a problem mostly due to the MM's poor handling of platoons. MM tends to match up platoon, to another platoon without looking at the vehicles. so for example you get Maus platoon vs couple of random tier 10s. or your tier 8 MT platoon is matched against a couple of IS3As on a city map. or similar fail.

 



Cobra6 #16 Posted 06 February 2019 - 01:31 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16418 battles
  • 16,423
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

It's got to do with the fact that platoons are actively punished by the matchmaker.

Platoons pretty much always get bottom-tier MM which is a remnant of old days where the MM didn't properly balance platoons out and this was needed.

 

It's a MM rule that needs to be scrapped as soon as possible as playing with buddies should not be discouraged but actively encouraged. The MM already puts the same amount of platoons on each team (and at the same tier most of the time as well). 

So players in a platoon should get exactly the same MM as a single random player gets.

 

Cobra 6

 

Edited by Cobra6, 06 February 2019 - 02:00 PM.


Baldrickk #17 Posted 06 February 2019 - 01:39 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 31337 battles
  • 15,523
  • [-TAH-] -TAH-
  • Member since:
    03-03-2013

View PostHassenderZerhacker, on 05 February 2019 - 07:15 PM, said:

 

yet another bold, unsubstantiated claim.

Or... I provided the evidence last year.

Green line is allies only, no platoon games

Red line is allies only with platoon games still included

 

 

 

 



Dorander #18 Posted 06 February 2019 - 01:53 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 18688 battles
  • 3,608
  • Member since:
    05-07-2012

View PostHassenderZerhacker, on 06 February 2019 - 11:27 AM, said:

 

1- read my line again. I didn't say they are using the patent now. I say WG gave it serious thought. That *FACT* alone requires any statement towards "there is no rigging in this game" to be backed by proof.

 

2- I did run it through Baldrickk's tool and it did show that indeed my battles are unbalanced in a statistically significant way. search the thread, you will find my results.

 

1: Read what I actually wrote. I didn't address whether you claimed they were using the patent. I stated that regardless of whether they use the patent or not it doesn't rig the matchmaker in any of the ways described in this thread or any other "rigging" thread.

 

2: I tried to find it but perhaps I am overlooking it, since you did the experiment and posted results perhaps you'd provide a link to the relevant location.



NUKLEAR_SLUG #19 Posted 06 February 2019 - 02:37 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 31208 battles
  • 3,013
  • [FISHY] FISHY
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015

View PostHassenderZerhacker, on 06 February 2019 - 12:27 PM, said:

 

1- read my line again. I didn't say they are using the patent now. I say WG gave it serious thought. That *FACT* alone requires any statement towards "there is no rigging in this game" to be backed by proof.

 

 

Well today's your lucky day! One of the community team (Eekaboo maybe?) recently definitively stated that he'd checked with the devs and got confirmation WG do not in any way manipulate MM or artificially limit WR in any way. Anyone care to dig up the exact quote for this potato?

 

Looking forward to you proving that in fact WG do manipulate this with your rafts of available evidence...



kubawt112 #20 Posted 06 February 2019 - 02:41 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 3378 battles
  • 384
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostRenesco, on 05 February 2019 - 04:53 PM, said:

I've noticed it, I play with a friend a few nights a week, we have a 3-loss rule where if we lose 3 games in a row we quit for the day. Over 4 days we played like 15 or 16 games because it was like 1 win followed by 3 losses every time. Then I'd play by myself and get 5 or 6 wins in a row.

 

I like your rule, but seeing as platoons are (usually) matched - how do you explain the other one getting a win? I'm pretty sure you're a good player (though I do remember seeing your Centurion driving into a rock and cuddling it for a minute or two) but even good players may struggle against 'cheesy' platoons - e.g. decent-ish players with strong tanks and heavy reliance on the '2'-button. The solution may be to avoid picking 'weak' tanks in certain tiers and/or particular combinations.

 

Remember: The subclass system is not in effect for platoons (and not too much in general). That means a platoon of Kranvagn+T110E5 can be matched versus Type 5+Maus. Same goes for T8. 2xFCM 50t can well meet a platoon of 2xIS-3A or 2xDefender. Trying to avoid that may be important if you prefer to win - alternatively setting realistic standards, blaming your team or simply accepting that WoT is the kind of game that shafts you every once in a while.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users