Jump to content

Something positive, and a thought

mm improved old before

  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

samuelx43a #1 Posted 12 May 2020 - 05:45 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 30109 battles
  • 1,326
  • Member since:

So seeing all these MM posts about complaints, I just had to do one, but not about your typical "waah waaah bed mAtChMaKiNg"

I would actually like to say that the MM has improved by a decent margin, and how nice it is to play compared to before(I'm sure that all of you remember the horrible time that was being a tier VIII tank and essentialy guaranteed being bottom tier against tier Xs, even more so when you were in a platoon because people discovered an exploit).


I'm sure you've all seen these posts about the old world of tanks MM, with +3 or even more, seeing tier Xs in your tier VIII used to be a very common ocurrence... etc


Now, at least most of the time, I don't really have complaints about the MM at all, except for some slight issues that I think are being resolved at the moment (I do sometimes forget to read the news articles, so I'm very sorry if I'm beating a dead horse)


As for the thought, it is about the way the MM sets up the classes in the game. Like all of you know, just because a tank is of a specific class does not mean it has to (for example, an amx 50B and a squonk both are heavy tanks, but their roles are totally different, and so on)

Unless I'm living under a rock, I sometimes see same tank classes that perform different roles, like a T30 vs a waffle panzer IV, or a lt-432 vs the lynx 6x6(I think they are actually working on this, but correct me if I'm wrong)

All this brought me back when weegee wanted to make the tank classes more diverse, but it ended up more complicated than they thought, so my question is:

Do you think they can put a "hidden role" to each tank to put them in the closest similar possibility? (things like a "fast heavy" that would encompass tanks like the 50B, 277, 5A, then you'd have the super heavies) Unless they have actually implemented this, it would be a nice thing to see, as that way we wouldn't have disparities like your team having a maus and the enemy having a 279e.


If you have bothered to read this far, thank you very much for reading, and beware of the soap rocks!



Oh, before I forget, please do show the worse matchmaking ever pictures, if you can find them, things like almost 7+ arty per team, or 6 lights per team, stuff like that. This is just for fun really



Jauhesammutin #2 Posted 13 May 2020 - 08:58 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 24287 battles
  • 1,208
  • Member since:

I don't have old screenshots because I upgraded my PC in 2016, but I did upload some replays to wotreplays.


Must have been fun game for those T8, right? Note the T10 BC on the enemy team.




MM for lights was quite brutal. Crusader and Covenanter "fail" platoon is equal to 2 IS-2's?



People say that the games used to last longer and now they are "always" over in under 5 minutes. Well could this be the case why the games felt so long?



shikaka9 #3 Posted 13 May 2020 - 05:02 PM


  • Player
  • 78403 battles
  • 2,404
  • [-SJA-] -SJA-
  • Member since:

yes MassacreMaker almost reached its best form, soon we wont expect anything better


Utopia becoming Reality

murn123 #4 Posted 14 May 2020 - 12:59 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 13493 battles
  • 338
  • Member since:
MM is not even in the top 10 worst things about this game anymore. People forget just how brutal it used to be.

wotlx #5 Posted 14 May 2020 - 04:01 AM


  • Player
  • 11928 battles
  • 89
  • Member since:

i feel nothing better about mm.

tier viii still gets tier x often and never -1 or -2

my last game today was a 4:21 15-0 defeat +1. thats bad matchmaking


so i totally disagree with the topic.

Also tagged with mm, improved, old, before

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users