1579 replies to this topic

[_Crusader6_]

CA_vampire, on 03 August 2020 - 02:54 AM, said:

 

You are right, the queue sizes are irrelevant. Whatever the MM rules are, it takes milliseconds for the computer to process them. 

 

And my advice is not to waste your time reading 70 pages. Nobody knows how MM works for this game. Only the computer programmers know, but they don't tell us. In my opinion, the most useless comments in these 70 pages are from the players who are "100 % convinced that MM is completely random". They have no idea what they are talking about, but they are 100% sure about it!!! Haha.

 

 

Conclusion: Just remember that human coders have programmed both the MM and the RNG (don't forget the RNG!!!), they can change the software any time, they can change it as often as they want to --- since it resides on the server. They can change it in any way they want, making it random, or not random, favoring players, clans, or just trying to make the game more streaky and more addictive for the players, or favoring weak players in an effort to keep them playing, or whatever. We don't know. We'll never know. You or I or anyone else on these forums has no idea how it works and how often the programmers change it ... and we can do nothing about it.  

 

Or one can simply look at the player base, and realize that it does all that for WG with no requirements for them to tinker.  The vast disparity in player skill makes it so WG doesn’t need to do anything more than roll the bones and let the chips fall. 
 
Occam’s Razor is still a pretty sharp tool.   

 

When WG changed MM to try to match tank types and balance platoons/team, it’s caused issues with queue times.  
    Now it’s no longer looking for tanks to fill the battle queue - it’s looking for specific tanks. 
  
I get you don’t like MM there CA_Vamp, but I’ve yet to see anyone here come up with a compelling reason to change it.  
  

If WG attempted balanced teams:

 1) better players will be upset. 
 2) what do you use for a balancing benchmark, that is effectively.

 3) why? 
 

I’ll be honest I like MM the way it is, simply because 2/3rd the time I can win regardless of the teams. 
  The vast amount of players are bad in this game, with very little understanding of game mechanics.  
The game rewards players who learn it, and effectively punishes those who don’t.  
 

I have results from over 5,500 battles, taken in 500 game subsets. 
  Both green and red team players, there stats over all, their 30-60-90 stats (where possible as many where not in Blitzstars or earlier in WOTBSTARS) as well as the tier stats and tank stats for what they played.  
 

All that I have gathered from the hours of data collection is that the player base is pretty bad.  
  

Anyone here is welcome to record data and put it out there. 
  

  

 

 

[CA_vampire]

_Crusader6_, on 03 August 2020 - 06:55 AM, said:

Or one can simply look at the player base, and realize that it does all that for WG with no requirements for them to tinker.  The vast disparity in player skill makes it so WG doesn’t need to do anything more than roll the bones and let the chips fall. 
 
Occam’s Razor is still a pretty sharp tool.   

 

When WG changed MM to try to match tank types and balance platoons/team, it’s caused issues with queue times.  
    Now it’s no longer looking for tanks to fill the battle queue - it’s looking for specific tanks. 
  
I get you don’t like MM there CA_Vamp, but I’ve yet to see anyone here come up with a compelling reason to change it.  
  

If WG attempted balanced teams:

 1) better players will be upset. 
 2) what do you use for a balancing benchmark, that is effectively.

 3) why? 
 

I’ll be honest I like MM the way it is, simply because 2/3rd the time I can win regardless of the teams. 
  The vast amount of players are bad in this game, with very little understanding of game mechanics.  
The game rewards players who learn it, and effectively punishes those who don’t.  
 

I have results from over 5,500 battles, taken in 500 game subsets. 
  Both green and red team players, there stats over all, their 30-60-90 stats (where possible as many where not in Blitzstars or earlier in WOTBSTARS) as well as the tier stats and tank stats for what they played.  
 

All that I have gathered from the hours of data collection is that the player base is pretty bad.  
  

Anyone here is welcome to record data and put it out there. 
  

  

 

 

 

I am a programmer.

 

You are not.

 

You don't even seem to understand what I wrote. 

 

So, why do you continue this? Do you believe you have to write a reply to everything that appears in these forums? It gets boring.

 

 

 

[j_rod]

CA_vampire, on 03 August 2020 - 01:54 AM, said:

 

You are right, the queue sizes are irrelevant. Whatever the MM rules are, it takes milliseconds for the computer to process them. 

 

And my advice is not to waste your time reading 70 pages. Nobody knows how MM works for this game. Only the computer programmers know, but they don't tell us. In my opinion, the most useless comments in these 70 pages are from the players who are "100 % convinced that MM is completely random". They have no idea what they are talking about, but they are 100% sure about it!!! Haha.

 

 

Conclusion: Just remember that human coders have programmed both the MM and the RNG (don't forget the RNG!!!), they can change the software any time, they can change it as often as they want to --- since it resides on the server. They can change it in any way they want, making it random, or not random, favoring players, clans, or just trying to make the game more streaky and more addictive for the players, or favoring weak players in an effort to keep them playing, or whatever. We don't know. We'll never know. You or I or anyone else on these forums has no idea how it works and how often the programmers change it ... and we can do nothing about it.  

 

Yet when we ask for data showing that MM isn’t random, all we get are anecdotes. 

[Dan_Deerso]

j_rod, on 03 August 2020 - 08:14 PM, said:

Yet when we ask for data showing that MM isn’t random, all we get are anecdotes. 

 

From him, we mostly just get "I am programmer man, you are stupid, evidence is useless, trust everything I say."

[_Crusader6_]

CA_vampire, on 03 August 2020 - 05:55 PM, said:

 

I am a programmer.

 

You are not.

 

You don't even seem to understand what I wrote. 

 

So, why do you continue this? Do you believe you have to write a reply to everything that appears in these forums? It gets boring.

 

 

 

You don’t seem to understand what I wrote. 
 

I’m not arguing what if.  I’m just reporting results.  
  Sure WG could have a secret base on the moon too.  
 
The burden of proof is on you to explain why you don’t think WG is being factual when they say it is random. 
   Multiple players have shown that at very worst it’s a very close call to random.  
 

 I mean you’re doing better 30-60-90, so does that mean that instead of getting better, WG just decides to tweak you?  
 

I don’t disagree that WG could be doing things behind the scenes.  
  What I am saying is if they are it’s significantly minor based on the data various of us have logged and posted here.  

All you need to do is look at the average player - then you understand why WG doesn’t need to monkey with anything - we have a enough Monkeys to compose Shakespeare’s complete works. We just need typewriters instead of the Blitz app... 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[GunShycc]

SpartacusDiablo, on 18 October 2017 - 04:33 PM, said:

You mean all those items that are available to everyone.

Let me fix that for you. Ahem, like if you want to blow lots of real cash on fantasy tanks with fantasy items, you can get them like “everyone else”. Yeah.

[_BobaFett]

GunShycc, on 05 August 2020 - 06:30 AM, said:

Let me fix that for you. Ahem, like if you want to blow lots of real cash on fantasy tanks with fantasy items, you can get them like “everyone else”. Yeah.

Why did you just quote a post from 2017?

[CA_vampire]

j_rod, on 03 August 2020 - 05:14 PM, said:

Yet when we ask for data showing that MM isn’t random, all we get are anecdotes. 

 

People who ask for "data" don't know what they are talking about! 

 

It is meaningless. It is like you are isolated in your house, you measure the temperature, and you make conclusions about the temperature everywhere on Earth! You got data to prove it, haha!

 

But it is actually worse than this. It is actually failure to understand the difference between "Nature" and "Software". 

 

To understand a computer program you don't need "data", you need to read the computer code! 

 

Is it so hard for people to understand that software is not a physical system? It is not Nature. It is not Random Evolution. It is not Physical Laws. It is just computer code that some particular humans wrote. It can do whatever the programmers set it to do. There are no unbreakable laws of nature. The programmers are kind of "gods" there, they can do whatever they want in their software. 

 

Please read again my previous post. What I wrote there is so simple and self evident, that requires no discussion. It is 1+1=2. Simple. It is not conspiracy theories. It is not assumptions. Read it again with open mind and you will see that I just point the obvious! 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[CA_vampire]

Guys, today my Chrome Browser edition is 84.0.4147.105. 

 

Major edition 84.

Minor: 0

Build: 4147

Revision: 105

 

Do you have any idea how often they change the Chrome browser?

 

Did you even notice that it changes? Do you know that it changes quite often? How often? 

 

If someone wanted to find out how Chrome works, would he "collect data" or just "read the code"? He would read the code, of course! People would laugh at you (and stop talking to you!) if you suggested that to understand what Chrome is doing you will ... "collect data". Here is the code, have a look how often it changes: 

 

https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git

 

 

 

 

[_BobaFett]

CA_vampire, on 05 August 2020 - 07:58 PM, said:

Guys, today my Chrome Browser edition is 84.0.4147.105. 

 

Major edition 84.

Minor: 0

Build: 4147

Revision: 105

 

Do you have any idea how often they change the Chrome browser?

 

Did you even notice that it changes? Do you know that it changes quite often? How often? 

 

If someone wanted to find out how Chrome works, would he "collect data" or just "read the code"? He would read the code, of course! People would laugh at you (and stop talking to you!) if you suggested that to understand what Chrome is doing you will ... "collect data". Here is the code, have a look how often it changes: 

 

https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git

 

 

 

 

Go read the code of WOTB then, if you're so smart. You are a programmer after all, and vastly smarter than all of us.

Edited by Nathanronco, 05 August 2020 - 08:08 PM.

[CA_vampire]

I hope that the explanations above help you understand what I am saying. 

 

And the answers to the questions for those who don't click on links: the Chrome source code changes every couple of minutes. I don't know how often the make changes to the release you are using on your computer, a manager decides this. 

 

And I don't know how often WG changes the server code for wotb. They could change it every day during the restarts. We don't know. 

[CA_vampire]

Nathanronco, on 05 August 2020 - 01:07 PM, said:

Go read the code of WOTB then, if you're so smart. You are a programmer after all, and vastly smarter than all of us.

 

I can read the Chrome code. Obviously, I can't read the wotb code because I can't find it. That's why I explained again and again that we don't know what the wotb code is doing. It's simple. It can do whatever they want, I don't know (and you don't know either!). 

 

What I do know is that suggesting to "use data" is just a meaningless statement from people who have no idea what is going on. 

 

 

[_Crusader6_]

CA_Vamp, you ever think that you overthink this?  
 
  Google has many reasons for Chrome changes.  
    
I’m not a programmer, I deal with real world issues

  What does WG gain from it?   You have never provided a real reason as to why WG would bother with the tinkering.  
Again maybe they do, but many of us have often suspected that WG uses some sort of weighting system. 
 If they are dabbling on the code with significant changes one would think that it would be noticeable. 
 
But folks don’t see major swings changing clans or dropping a clan entirely - so it’s not like they are picking favorites that way.  
  
Basically you are a conspiracy theorist here.  We all know three can keep a secret if two of them are dead - and WG has had many people leave without a rash of heart attacks or single vehicle crashes.   
 

Plus you living in CA should realize the consumer protection laws that could outright smash WG in NA if they where rigging against players.   WG has repeatedly said things are random - so if they aren’t at least applied equally they are setting themselves up for issues.   
 

All for what?   7 random monkeys against 7 other random monkeys?   

[Surfex]

TODAY'S 40 RANKED MATCHES

 

Top Player: 12 games

Second Best: 19 games

3rd best: 8

4th: 1 

 

Wins: 8

Win rate: 20%

Top 3 percent: 97.5%

Rating: 3153

 

Care to tell me that MM isn't broken as [edited]? How can I be top 3 - 97.5% of the time and have a win rate of 20% out of 40 freak'n matches unless WG is messing with the MM and it's broken. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Amm0rat]

Surfex, on 05 August 2020 - 06:30 PM, said:

TODAY'S 40 RANKED MATCHES

 

Top Player: 12 games

Second Best: 19 games

3rd best: 8

4th: 1 

 

Wins: 8

Win rate: 20%

Top 3 percent: 97.5%

Rating: 3153

 

Care to tell me that MM isn't broken as [edited]? How can I be top 3 - 97.5% of the time and have a win rate of 20% out of 40 freak'n matches unless WG is messing with the MM and it's broken. 

 

Doesn't mean that MM is broken or rigged. That just means you lost a lot of games. 

[_Crusader6_]

Surfex, on 05 August 2020 - 05:30 PM, said:

TODAY'S 40 RANKED MATCHES

 

Top Player: 12 games

Second Best: 19 games

3rd best: 8

4th: 1 

 

Wins: 8

Win rate: 20%

Top 3 percent: 97.5%

Rating: 3153

 

Care to tell me that MM isn't broken as [edited]? How can I be top 3 - 97.5% of the time and have a win rate of 20% out of 40 freak'n matches unless WG is messing with the MM and it's broken. 

 

 

 

 

 

Based on your regular games Blitzstars results. The odds of you being top 2% of the time are highly suspect.  

[Dan_Deerso]

Surfex, on 05 August 2020 - 06:30 PM, said:

TODAY'S 40 RANKED MATCHES

 

Top Player: 12 games

Second Best: 19 games

3rd best: 8

4th: 1 

 

Wins: 8

Win rate: 20%

Top 3 percent: 97.5%

Rating: 3153

 

Care to tell me that MM isn't broken as [edited]? How can I be top 3 - 97.5% of the time and have a win rate of 20% out of 40 freak'n matches unless WG is messing with the MM and it's broken. 

 

You do know what Ranked is, right? 

[Absolute_Sniper]

Surfex, on 05 August 2020 - 10:30 PM, said:

TODAY'S 40 RANKED MATCHES

 

Top Player: 12 games

Second Best: 19 games

3rd best: 8

4th: 1 

 

Wins: 8

Win rate: 20%

Top 3 percent: 97.5%

Rating: 3153

 

Care to tell me that MM isn't broken as [edited]? How can I be top 3 - 97.5% of the time and have a win rate of 20% out of 40 freak'n matches unless WG is messing with the MM and it's broken. 

 

 

 

 

 

Being the best on your team and winning games are not the same thing. In most of my losses I’m at or near the top performer on my team. That’s because I stayed alive longer and was able to get a few more shots in before the inevitable. A few weeks back I lost 8 of 10 games and did over 4K damage in each loss. I did less than 1500 in the wins. This happens because Blitz involves 6 other players besides me and the reds just did better. Doing well and still losing happens all the time. 

[CA_vampire]

One more thing: For a computer programmer is easy to write the code for the matchmaker, even if it uses a complicated strategy comparing past wins, a hidden time-to-lose variable etc etc etc.

 

It is just a comparison of numbers, for less than 1,000 tanks. This is fast and easy.  I mean it is easy when comparing it to other programming aspects of this game, like the 3D models, animations, smooth and realistic movement, collisions, etc. The MM is one of the easiest modules.

 

And it is natural that they have programmer(s) for that, and it is natural for the programmers to experiment with various strategies, especially since this is something hidden on the server. They can be changing the MM often and none of us would realize it. Obviously, they decided to keep one of their experiments, hence the Ratings. 

 

Of course, the goal of the MM is to make you addicted to the game. That's the main goal of every game out there! 

 

 

[Texas_Tyrant]

IF MM is rigged explain the correlation between damage out put and winning. I do agree with you though that it is very easy to rig, I believe though that it is fair as possible. Its random as I can see. Besides that there is no proof of correlation between paying for goodies and WR.

 

Yeehaw,

Texas_Tyrant