1542 replies to this topic

[BAR_001]

Just had a tier 8 game @ mines, a KV-4 and an Obj 252U sat in the back with the TD's. The thing is they had 12,000 and over 23,000 battles respectively. Im no unicom, but how can these plebs have played that many games and still have so little of a clue? Its stunning. I yelled at them. Couldnt help myself.

[Texas_Tyrant]

BAR_001, on 11 July 2020 - 05:56 PM, said:

Just had a tier 8 game @ mines, a KV-4 and an Obj 252U sat in the back with the TD's. The thing is they had 12,000 and over 23,000 battles respectively. Im no unicom, but how can these plebs have played that many games and still have so little of a clue? Its stunning. I yelled at them. Couldnt help myself.

I often wonder if they are different people on the same account...would explain the battle count with their in battle performance. Of course, newbs with two "oo's" do exist.

Some people just don't learn; if naming and shaming wasn't such a taboo, I'd start a WoTB Darwin Award. I would have so many awards to give out

Yeehaw,

Texas_Tyrant

[BAR_001]

Texas_Tyrant, on 11 July 2020 - 11:17 PM, said:

I often wonder if they are different people on the same account...would explain the battle count with their in battle performance. Of course, newbs with two "oo's" do exist.

Some people just don't learn; if naming and shaming wasn't such a taboo, I'd start a WoTB Darwin Award. I would have so many awards to give out

Yeehaw,

Texas_Tyrant

 

 I have advocated some sort of tutorial or skill level requirement to advance up tiers for a long time. Do you think WG will ever do the math and realize that the quality of the player base translates directly to the quality of the game? Or will their give a rip factor just continue to remain at zero? 

[hul_steel]

Wow, a lot like Ive been saying for ages - Have players limited to what tier tank tier they can play until wr \avg damage reaches a certain level. Let them BUY OR GRIND whatever tank they want and salivate over playing it until their game improves. Provides both motivation and profits for WOTB. Wouldnt cure everything, but anything to help with the extreme bonehead problems. Of course a real tutorial would help a bit too tho many players simply dont care enough about anyone to heed what is taught.

[j_rod]

hul_steel, on 15 July 2020 - 12:36 PM, said:

Wow, a lot like Ive been saying for ages - Have players limited to what tier tank tier they can play until wr \avg damage reaches a certain level. Let them BUY OR GRIND whatever tank they want and salivate over playing it until their game improves. Provides both motivation and profits for WOTB. Wouldnt cure everything, but anything to help with the extreme bonehead problems. Of course a real tutorial would help a bit too tho many players simply dont care enough about anyone to heed what is taught.

FFS, it’s a video game. If you or anyone else think that WG is going to limit people from playing higher tier tanks bc of skill (or lack thereof) you’ve lost your ****ing mind. 
 

Could they do a better job of teaching players? Absolutely. But to think they will limit players due to skill is just plain stupid.

[Rou_Garou]

Question for the forum:

What is balanced matchmaking?

I am sure WG has a definition and I feel that everyone possibly has their own definition or mostly what they desire it to be.

Since player wr is not a factor, then balancing tanks and tiers are the options available.

With those parameters in mind, what would be ideal matchup for a competitive battle?

equal # heavies, tds, etc.

same tier for each type

same tanks on each side

 

On another note; I heard in WG live stream discussion MM.  One consideration is to include the wr or performance of the tank in the algorithm, where you would not have a Obj 252U platoon vs a Caernarvon platoon as the top tier heavies. That seems legit.

 

Thoughts please. The focus on this debate is too much on wr of players and this isn't even a consideration in MM.  The flood gates are open and upper tiers will have some lower skilled players forever.  

 

So, What is balanced MM?

 

[j_rod]

Rou_Garou, on 18 July 2020 - 06:52 PM, said:

Question for the forum:

What is balanced matchmaking?

I am sure WG has a definition and I feel that everyone possibly has their own definition or mostly what they desire it to be.

Since player wr is not a factor, then balancing tanks and tiers are the options available.

With those parameters in mind, what would be ideal matchup for a competitive battle?

equal # heavies, tds, etc.

same tier for each type

same tanks on each side

 

On another note; I heard in WG live stream discussion MM.  One consideration is to include the wr or performance of the tank in the algorithm, where you would not have a Obj 252U platoon vs a Caernarvon platoon as the top tier heavies. That seems legit.

 

Thoughts please. The focus on this debate is too much on wr of players and this isn't even a consideration in MM.  The flood gates are open and upper tiers will have some lower skilled players forever.  

 

So, What is balanced MM?

 

Equal number of types is what they shoot for already.

 

Same tanks on each side isn’t possible due to queue size.

 

Balancing based on the winrate in the tank is possible I guess but will just bring everyone closer to being a 50%er.

 

The issue isn’t with MM, it’s with the skill level of the average player.

[IronBehemoth]

Rou_Garou, on 19 July 2020 - 12:52 AM, said:

Question for the forum:

What is balanced matchmaking?

I am sure WG has a definition and I feel that everyone possibly has their own definition or mostly what they desire it to be.

Since player wr is not a factor, then balancing tanks and tiers are the options available.

With those parameters in mind, what would be ideal matchup for a competitive battle?

equal # heavies, tds, etc.

same tier for each type

same tanks on each side

 

On another note; I heard in WG live stream discussion MM.  One consideration is to include the wr or performance of the tank in the algorithm, where you would not have a Obj 252U platoon vs a Caernarvon platoon as the top tier heavies. That seems legit.

 

Thoughts please. The focus on this debate is too much on wr of players and this isn't even a consideration in MM.  The flood gates are open and upper tiers will have some lower skilled players forever.  

 

So, What is balanced MM?

 

Winrates should never be factored into MM imo. I'm not, however, opposed to them taking tanks into consideration.

[_BobaFett]

If you take a look at some of the very oldest videos on YouTube, like 4-5 maybe more years ago, you'll see that the matchmaker was pretty trash. You could have 3 tier 8s on one team and 7 tier 10s on the other. And it didn't care if there were platoons on both teams. I think matchmaker is fine as it is, I don't think balancing teams out by skill is really ever going to happen.

Edited by Nathanronco, 20 July 2020 - 03:28 PM.

[bwcamp]

Nathanronco, on 20 July 2020 - 03:27 PM, said:

If you take a look at some of the very oldest videos on YouTube, like 4-5 maybe more years ago, you'll see that the matchmaker was pretty trash. You could have 3 tier 8s on one team and 7 tier 10s on the other. And it didn't care if there were platoons on both teams. I think matchmaker is fine as it is, I don't think balancing teams out by skill is really ever going to happen.

It's possible, but I see no need to do it. If you're good, your stats will show it, if you're not they won't. Simple. People saying your teams can drag down your stats, that may be for 1-2 battles, but if you're overall stats are bad, than you're not a good player. I myself have been getting better(been watching a heck of a lot of Youtube vids)so if MM sucked, that wouldn't happen.

[_Crusader6_]

Nathanronco, on 20 July 2020 - 10:27 AM, said:

If you take a look at some of the very oldest videos on YouTube, like 4-5 maybe more years ago, you'll see that the matchmaker was pretty trash. You could have 3 tier 8s on one team and 7 tier 10s on the other. And it didn't care if there were platoons on both teams. I think matchmaker is fine as it is, I don't think balancing teams out by skill is really ever going to happen.

In +/-2 I had a hot key

: Go Home MM You’re DRUNK 

Tier disparities was common at times. 
I put screenshots up several years ago of a 5x 8, 2x9 green team against a 5xX, 2x9 red team.  
  
That was solved during the -+/-1 trial period and when we went back to +/-2 after the trial teams where balanced for tier. 
You won’t find anyone who misses tier mismatch 
 

 

To me type matching is boring. I enjoy the diversity that non evenly type matches give. 

[bwcamp]

_Crusader6_, on 22 July 2020 - 08:35 PM, said:

In +/-2 I had a hot key

: Go Home MM You’re DRUNK 

Tier disparities was common at times. 
I put screenshots up several years ago of a 5x 8, 2x9 green team against a 5xX, 2x9 red team.  
  
That was solved during the -+/-1 trial period and when we went back to +/-2 after the trial teams where balanced for tier. 
You won’t find anyone who misses tier mismatch 
 

 

To me type matching is boring. I enjoy the diversity that non evenly type matches give. 

I would be better if they tried to match teams by skill and tanks(modules), not by tank type.

[_Crusader6_]

bwcamp, on 22 July 2020 - 03:56 PM, said:

I would be better if they tried to match teams by skill and tanks(modules), not by tank type.

No. 

 Skill based MM would be a nightmare for Blitz.  
For it to mean anything you’d need to use Individual tank data - that to be under +/5% reliable needs of 440 battle in a tank.  
 Say you don’t use individual tank stats,  If I’m 65%+ in one tank in X, but 50% in another - where does one get put.  
WG doesn’t use Wn8 etc so it’s a WR/DMG set most likely - and if you balance teams - they are start driving to the middle.  
 That’s going to make any 60%’er furious. 
 

 

Modules - why? WG would not benefit then (selling free exp conversion) and those of us with all likes ground and hundred of K of Free Exp don’t benefit either. 
  New tanks already get a honeymoon period 

 

[Rou_Garou]

+2/-2

Could this mode be made available again. 

It sounds intriguing.  I started in Dec 2016 and missed it.

I realize tanks are balanced with +1/-1 mentality

I would try it out if it was an event like gravity

or even separate mode like ratings

[bwcamp]

Rou_Garou, on 23 July 2020 - 12:29 PM, said:

+2/-2

Could this mode be made available again. 

It sounds intriguing.  I started in Dec 2016 and missed it.

I realize tanks are balanced with +1/-1 mentality

I would try it out if it was an event like gravity

or even separate mode like ratings

You don't want that. I've played PC, and it would probably be even worse in Blitz.

[_Crusader6_]

bwcamp, on 23 July 2020 - 08:32 AM, said:

You don't want that. I've played PC, and it would probably be even worse in Blitz.

It forces players to think more than +/-1. Now I know it won’t come back - as so many folks whined about being low tier.  
  But I and many more played it - I agree it was awful in a stock tier 8 when you where -2, but it made you a lot more aware and you needed to support your team - either tracking reds or using mobility.  
 

The fact is now -1 tanks can still pen the top tier tanks - sure they may need to use Prammo - but it’s not nearly as team Oriented as +/-2 was.    
 

+/-1 is what it is, it actually favors better players - but it gives the poorer players the illusion of being ‘fairer’.  Plus now you can’t blame being a -2 for failing to contribute.  My point wasn’t that we should go back to +/-2, it was simply that +/-1 MM was the start of the slide that teams matter less.  
  
The player base by and large now is a rotten sewer.  
  

 

[bwcamp]

_Crusader6_, on 23 July 2020 - 06:09 PM, said:

The player base by and large now is a rotten sewer.  

Not a sewer. A dump, full of trash.

[erovi]

A lot has been said about MM. After a few years playing all I can say is that so many 7-0 and 7-1 battles shows that something is wrong with the game and needs to be fixed. WOT developers should look at the stats and find some reasonable way for the company to keep making money without causing so much frustration in players. The game should be fun and fair. Many times it iisn't. Im sure the problem can be fixed´if WOTB decides to do so. For their sake and ours,hope they do it soon.

[_Crusader6_]

erovi, on 25 July 2020 - 12:47 AM, said:

A lot has been said about MM. After a few years playing all I can say is that so many 7-0 and 7-1 battles shows that something is wrong with the game and needs to be fixed. WOT developers should look at the stats and find some reasonable way for the company to keep making money without causing so much frustration in players. The game should be fun and fair. Many times it iisn't. Im sure the problem can be fixed´if WOTB decides to do so. For their sake and ours,hope they do it soon.

Define fair.

  Is it fair for me and another 60%+ players to have to listen to 40% players complain about MM?  

‘Balanced’ teams are not fair - and of course the whole is of what is a balanced Team comes up. 

Steamrolls happen simply due to math. 
  When a player dies early his HP and DPM are gone. 
So now the other team has an advantage, and it doesn’t matter what the skill levels are. 
 7v6 quickly turns into 7v5 etc. 

 

You can still see steamrolls in high level tournaments due to this. - less often, but they do still happen 

 

Steam rolls where less a factor in +/-2, simply due to the fact some of the lower tier tanks usually got picked off before a total roll occurred.  Now in +/-1 pretty much any tank can pen all the tanks on the other team - so focus fire is much more deadly now. 

You want to have less steamrolls- be a better player. 
 

 

[Sniper_Hanz]

_Crusader6_, on 25 July 2020 - 05:21 PM, said:

Define fair.

  Is it fair for me and another 60%+ players to have to listen to 40% players complain about MM?  

‘Balanced’ teams are not fair - and of course the whole is of what is a balanced Team comes up. 

Steamrolls happen simply due to math. 
  When a player dies early his HP and DPM are gone. 
So now the other team has an advantage, and it doesn’t matter what the skill levels are. 
 7v6 quickly turns into 7v5 etc. 

 

You can still see steamrolls in high level tournaments due to this. - less often, but they do still happen 

 

Steam rolls where less a factor in +/-2, simply due to the fact some of the lower tier tanks usually got picked off before a total roll occurred.  Now in +/-1 pretty much any tank can pen all the tanks on the other team - so focus fire is much more deadly now. 

You want to have less steamrolls- be a better player. 
 

 

Don't know where you get that 40% players complaint about MM, but if that's the case, statistically speaking that's a number high enough to justify that WOTB developers need to look for a way to make the game more satisfying to every player. You can't asume that 60% of players are satisfied with the game. Many of these could well be dissatisfied but don't express their opinion in this forum.  I agree with  those who say the argument would be over if WOTB just gave us a detailed explanation on how they go about MM, both for new and experienced players. Thanks.

Edited by Sniper_Hanz, 27 July 2020 - 04:26 AM.