Jump to content


We need skill based matchmaking

matchmaking skill servers personal rating

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
234 replies to this topic

Poll: We need skill based matchmaking (129 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 250 battle in order to participate this poll.

Do you want a skill based matchmaking system?

  1. Yes (40 votes [31.01%])

    Percentage of vote: 31.01%

  2. No (state why in the comments) (89 votes [68.99%])

    Percentage of vote: 68.99%

Vote Hide poll

zin #1 Posted 29 August 2020 - 06:57 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 10567 battles
  • 27
  • [BEGE] BEGE
  • Member since:
    04-17-2011

Seriously, it's annoying as hell to keep losing round after round because of disproportionately skilled teams. Either you steamroll the other team or you get steamrolled. Maybe one in twenty matches are somewhat even. It's disheartening when individual performance isn't really rewarded. You can improve your skill but you still have to play with vastly less skilled players, and more skilled ones. It's not fun for either team. It's also not fun when you lose 10 times in a row because of the same typical mistakes your team do(because they're less experienced). This is an issue that affects every player. You shouldn't have to play with someone several thousand in personal rating lower or higher than you. The many problems these matches bring will be effectively negated with skill based matchmaking.

 

The lack of a proper matchmaking system is what makes me quit this game for long periods of time before I forget about it and come back again, only to repeat the same process. It's not fun to gamble on what kind of teammates you'll get. Being able to rely on another teammate is very important, or you end up dying when you take the initiative needed to win. Higher skilled players are more likely to notice other player's initiatives and back it. Lower skilled ones probably won't. Personal rating may not be the best indication of skill, but it's the best one we got.

 

So WG, is it really that difficult for you to implement a skill based matchmaking system for random battles? Tie the matchmaking to personal rating and make groupings of 1000 each, up to 6000, then 6000-7500 and 7500 and above. If for some reason a match cannot be found within X amount of time, it'll drop you down a matchmaking tier. So if you're at 6000 rating but cannot find any games between 6000-7500, then you'll be dropped down to the 5000-6000 tier. If you're at 0-1000 then you'll go up one tier. If one queues in a party, then you'll queue for the average rating of the party.

 

Also funnel players from server 2 to server 1 when there are fewer than 100k people online. The only reason to have a second server is so players have something to do while you at WG maintain the first server. Other than this it just divides the playerbase. Using only one server when there aren't many players will help improve the matchmaking pool that is needed for a skill based matchmaking system. And if the servers cannot handle the load, then maybe you need to invest in better servers. With all those whales keeping you going, you can surely afford it.

 

Sincerely,

zin


Edited by zin, 29 August 2020 - 07:01 PM.


fwhaatpiraat #2 Posted 29 August 2020 - 07:01 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 64302 battles
  • 2,938
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

View Postzin, on 29 August 2020 - 06:57 PM, said:

Either you steamroll the other team or you get steamrolled. Maybe one in twenty matches are somewhat even. It's disheartening when individual performance isn't really rewarded.

Debunked: http://forum.worldof...attle-duration/

 



Balc0ra #3 Posted 29 August 2020 - 07:03 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 79120 battles
  • 24,398
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

Do you believe your WR would be higher if they added it? Or your ability to make more of an impact was increased playing vs equally skilled? Or would you face a wall equal to your self all the time? As ranked have also shown, that alone won't prevent landslides, lemming fails or campers. 

 

Tbh... that's what everyone thought when that "other" game did it after everyone that left WOT asked for it. It killed the MM and the game in less than 3 weeks after it was added. WG learned a lesson there. If you can't do it 100%, don't bother with it. 

 

 



WindSplitter1 #4 Posted 29 August 2020 - 07:11 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 22444 battles
  • 4,454
  • [WINDY] WINDY
  • Member since:
    02-07-2016

Before that, we need systems to ensure players, new or mediocre players are able to not just understand basic game mechanics but also to know how to implement that knowledge in the battlefield.

 

Battles might seem unbalanced and certainly player skill has something to do with it.

 

SBMM is not the answer to the problem because it treats the symptoms, not the underlying issue. It's just a crutch for the lesser players.

 

I blame WG for removing -3 MM and making idiot-proof heavies.

 


Edited by WindSplitter1, 29 August 2020 - 07:11 PM.


Obsessive_Compulsive #5 Posted 29 August 2020 - 07:15 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 29860 battles
  • 8,798
  • Member since:
    09-09-2014

You asked me to state why I said no.

 

Firstly I do not understand who you mean when you say 'we' do you mean everyone who plays, people who suck at tanks, you and your freinds or do you mean you and your alter-ego's?

 

All I know is that I do not need skill based matchmaking as need implies it is extremely important.

 

I do not want it either, I enjoy those games where my team are braindead and I have to hero the win!

 



NUKLEAR_SLUG #6 Posted 29 August 2020 - 07:16 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38394 battles
  • 6,898
  • [FISHY] FISHY
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015
No. Because its a terrible idea.

Private_Miros #7 Posted 29 August 2020 - 07:17 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 31063 battles
  • 12,511
  • [EMU87] EMU87
  • Member since:
    07-09-2011

Blatant P2W premiums, messed up tank imbalance in general, and at best funnel maps where losing 1 or 2 choke points or vision points early is almost guaranteed a quick loss - and at worst maps clearly unbalanced towards one spawn, are all issues with far more negative impact to gaming experience and snow ball losses than the relatively low number of manifestly skill unbalanced games the MM creates.

 

I think those 10 or so (see Baldrick's replay analyser) percent of unbalanced games should be fixed, but that's hardly the main issue for the problem you are describing - even if the problem is not that big as you claim, as fwhaatpiraat already linked to my thread that shows short and high score difference battles are less than 1/4 - 1/5 of the battles.


Edited by Private_Miros, 29 August 2020 - 07:18 PM.


Strapps #8 Posted 29 August 2020 - 07:23 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 29997 battles
  • 12,002
  • [GONAD] GONAD
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

Voted no and I'm not explaining why because I'm an edgelord anarchist who plays by my own rules, baby.

 

And also because those who replied above have already explained why. But that's not quite as edgy.



zin #9 Posted 29 August 2020 - 07:24 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 10567 battles
  • 27
  • [BEGE] BEGE
  • Member since:
    04-17-2011

View Postfwhaatpiraat, on 29 August 2020 - 06:01 PM, said:

My statement was mostly hyperbole. Thanks for the link though.

 

View PostBalc0ra, on 29 August 2020 - 06:03 PM, said:

Do you believe your WR would be higher if they added it? Or your ability to make more of an impact was increased playing vs equally skilled? Or would you face a wall equal to your self all the time? As ranked have also shown, that alone won't prevent landslides, lemming fails or campers. 

 

Tbh... that's what everyone thought when that "other" game did it after everyone that left WOT asked for it. It killed the MM and the game in less than 3 weeks after it was added. WG learned a lesson there. If you can't do it 100%, don't bother with it. 

 

 

 

My WR would probably stay about the same. Individual impact would probably be higher on both teams for those who seize opportunities. The general idea is to be able to play with more equally skilled players.

 

Edit: Personal rating is not the most optimal system. Was just an ideal though. I still think a skill based system is needed to improve matches. It could also be separate from normal random battles to see if it gains traction.


Edited by zin, 29 August 2020 - 07:29 PM.


shikaka9 #10 Posted 29 August 2020 - 07:31 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 81292 battles
  • 3,003
  • Member since:
    02-27-2013

no , because there is no skill in this game. 

 

just wallet power.

 

YES for wallet based Matchmaker, a big YES

 



Panzerfighter_ #11 Posted 29 August 2020 - 07:33 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 72266 battles
  • 162
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    04-19-2011
No, SBMM ruined already Cod MW. Every game is a sweatfest, u need to run the meta guns or ur [edited]. I dont wanna have this in Wot.

Edited by unhappy__bunny, 29 August 2020 - 07:56 PM.
swearing


Alkovich #12 Posted 29 August 2020 - 07:41 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 644 battles
  • 55
  • Member since:
    08-07-2017
If the game dies after SBMM is added then the game is full of cowards.

fwhaatpiraat #13 Posted 29 August 2020 - 07:43 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 64302 battles
  • 2,938
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

View PostPanzerfighter_, on 29 August 2020 - 07:33 PM, said:

No, SBMM ruined already Cod MW. Every game is a sweatfest, u need to run the meta guns or ur [edited]. I dont wanna have this in Wot.

You should consider playing skirmishes, it's a lot of fun Kappa



WarlockOPain #14 Posted 29 August 2020 - 08:28 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 36950 battles
  • 195
  • [EST-D] EST-D
  • Member since:
    08-12-2012

When it comes then how players with high stats can keep their stats? They only have to play vs the same stats players and the stats begin to fall, because their opponents is too skilled players :) Then there will be a great ''unicum'' cry :)  So it skill based MM doesn't come.

 



StronkiTonki #15 Posted 29 August 2020 - 08:31 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Clan Commander
  • 37106 battles
  • 1,970
  • [T0AST] T0AST
  • Member since:
    05-27-2011

No, because there is no precise way to measure skill.

It would also make the mm times last for 10 minutes or so.



Vaunont #16 Posted 29 August 2020 - 09:10 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 18572 battles
  • 19
  • Member since:
    11-29-2014

So lets be honest here. How many of you voted no because the like one sided face rolls, afraid of a real challenge?

 

At least those replying with no seem to have an above average rating. Curious why you want to play against noobs instead of players with equal skill.



NUKLEAR_SLUG #17 Posted 29 August 2020 - 09:16 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38394 battles
  • 6,898
  • [FISHY] FISHY
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015

View PostVaunont, on 29 August 2020 - 09:10 PM, said:

So lets be honest here. How many of you voted no because the like one sided face rolls, afraid of a real challenge?

 

At least those replying with no seem to have an above average rating. Curious why you want to play against noobs instead of players with equal skill.

 

The MM is already balanced, I get just as many teams full of potatoes as you do. 



ZlatanArKung #18 Posted 29 August 2020 - 09:24 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 1537 battles
  • 6,555
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
I wouldn't mind skillbased MM, as long as it isn't WG who are creating this skillbased system.

StronkiTonki #19 Posted 29 August 2020 - 09:25 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Clan Commander
  • 37106 battles
  • 1,970
  • [T0AST] T0AST
  • Member since:
    05-27-2011

View PostVaunont, on 29 August 2020 - 08:10 PM, said:

So lets be honest here. How many of you voted no because the like one sided face rolls, afraid of a real challenge?

 

At least those replying with no seem to have an above average rating. Curious why you want to play against noobs instead of players with equal skill.

 

"one sided face rolls" are the result of average increase or alpha, autoloaders, the increase of average speed of armored vehicles and the increased consistency of TD's. Not the MM.

I already made my point: There is no consistent way to measure skill. And even if there was, MM times would simply take too long to find people of equal skill.

MM already can take long enough during certain points of the day. It's simply a too unrealistic goal to achieve in a perfect manner.



arthurwellsley #20 Posted 29 August 2020 - 09:44 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 57255 battles
  • 4,631
  • [J1FTD] J1FTD
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

voted No.

reasons

1. There are fewer one sided games than the OP thinks.

2. The other game tried skill based MM and it drove players away in droves and was abandoned.

3. WG  skirmish based on elo. Effective that became a form of SBMM and lots of players complain about that.

4. WoT has been very successful with the current regime for ten years. Why mess with a winning formula. The game was designed to provide working men with easy pvp entertainment after a hard day at work, not to force them to use everything they have as ability to scrape a win.







Also tagged with matchmaking, skill, servers, personal rating

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users