2090 replies to this topic

[EL_Din_46]

__V_O_P__, on 29 June 2021 - 04:55 PM, said:

Well ED that’s why I keep posting. Because clearly MM isn’t doing that anymore. It states that there can only be one difference in tank type numbers - but that constraint clearly has gone out the window.

 

“The difference in the number of tanks of the same type for two teams should not be more than one (for example, if one team has 1 tank destroyer, then the second can have a maximum of 2 tank destroyers);”

I agree with Crusader, your example does meet that balancing requirement. There are some lineups that don’t make sense to me in terms of “total effectiveness.”

 

Bak also stated several area’s where he felt MM was inadequate; battles with skill imbalances, blowouts (“turbo drains” ?) and afk's, for example. I got the impression that he might agree with players more than we think he does but some problems are very difficult to solve.  MM is still a work in progress.

Edited by EL_Din_46, 01 July 2021 - 04:26 AM.

[__V_O_P__]

EL_Din_46, on 30 June 2021 - 11:19 PM, said:

I agree with Crusader, your example does meet that balancing requirement. There are some lineups that don’t make sense to me in terms of “total effectiveness.”

 

Bak also stated several area’s where he felt MM was inadequate; battles with skill imbalances, blowouts (“turbo drains” ?) and afk's, for example. I got the impression that he might agree with players more than we think he does but some problems are very difficult to solve.  MM is still a work in progress.

Treating lights and mediums as different is actually barking mad. the light / med flank has smaller HP pools and higher DPM it can be over very quickly. the same is not true of the heavy flank. so getting the balance correct on the light / med flank would seem to be very important in terms of overall game outcome. 

 

I’ll offer that skill imbalances are a training problem not an MM one. that blow outs happen in tournaments between the best teams, so it’s more a question of frequency than whether they occur at all. they will happen. when I’m on the team winning 7-0 it’s always skill. when it’s the other way around it’s always sucky MM. and I don’t see how you fix AFKs with MM - I can think of a few dumb ways to do it but they could all be abused.

 

Bak seems to be reaching for the MM hammer as if all WOTB player experience problems were nails. 

[_Crusader6_]

__V_O_P__, on 01 July 2021 - 06:34 AM, said:

Treating lights and mediums as different is actually barking mad. the light / med flank has smaller HP pools and higher DPM it can be over very quickly. the same is not true of the heavy flank. so getting the balance correct on the light / med flank would seem to be very important in terms of overall game outcome. 

 

I’ll offer that skill imbalances are a training problem not an MM one. that blow outs happen in tournaments between the best teams, so it’s more a question of frequency than whether they occur at all. they will happen. when I’m on the team winning 7-0 it’s always skill. when it’s the other way around it’s always sucky MM. and I don’t see how you fix AFKs with MM - I can think of a few dumb ways to do it but they could all be abused.

 

Bak seems to be reaching for the MM hammer as if all WOTB player experience problems were nails. 

MM says play more meds...

 

 

I agree with you on the Hammer and Nail issue.

    But I think MM is already too contrived - and rules should be loosened more to allow for more chaos.  

cookie cutter MM is stale and boring.

 

Edited by _Crusader6_, 01 July 2021 - 08:04 PM.

[watchmykneegrows]

I've been playing this game on my current account for over 2 years. I had a previous account back when the game was less than a year old as well and lost it when the device broke.

 

One thing I'll say is that the match making process is absolutely the worst feature of the game and the reason why I'm selling my current account.

 

I've sat down and done the math and it was easy to figure out how the wins and losses are affected by the match making process. First thing I did was add up the win rates from both teams and then divide that number by 7. That gave the overall win rate for the team of that match. I would play games where the win rate average would be plus or minus 10% on the average. Meaning that if your team had the higher win rate average then more than likely you were going to win the match. I've played in matches where the overall win rates average between two teams differed as much as 20%. Basically simple math and simple algorithms can be used to fix the match making process. But wot blitz doesn't care about that. The game is heavily unbalanced with every match. If the balance is in your team favor odds are that you will win. And vice versa if the odds aren't in your favor. I've only encountered a handful of games out of the 13 thousand matches I've played where the 2 teams of 7 players are balanced enough where it could be considered a good match. 

 

Of course other things to take into account would be average damage per game, average tier played,  tank type played. But that isn't the crux of the problem for many players that leave negative feedback on the game.

[j_rod]

watchmykneegrows, on 04 July 2021 - 11:10 AM, said:

I've been playing this game on my current account for over 2 years. I had a previous account back when the game was less than a year old as well and lost it when the device broke.

 

One thing I'll say is that the match making process is absolutely the worst feature of the game and the reason why I'm selling my current account.

 

I've sat down and done the math and it was easy to figure out how the wins and losses are affected by the match making process. First thing I did was add up the win rates from both teams and then divide that number by 7. That gave the overall win rate for the team of that match. I would play games where the win rate average would be plus or minus 10% on the average. Meaning that if your team had the higher win rate average then more than likely you were going to win the match. I've played in matches where the overall win rates average between two teams differed as much as 20%. Basically simple math and simple algorithms can be used to fix the match making process. But wot blitz doesn't care about that. The game is heavily unbalanced with every match. If the balance is in your team favor odds are that you will win. And vice versa if the odds aren't in your favor. I've only encountered a handful of games out of the 13 thousand matches I've played where the 2 teams of 7 players are balanced enough where it could be considered a good match. 

 

Of course other things to take into account would be average damage per game, average tier played,  tank type played. But that isn't the crux of the problem for many players that leave negative feedback on the game.

Given that MM is random, there are absolutely going to be games where one team is statistically much stronger than the other team. Thing is, you’re equally likely to benefit from those games as be impacted negatively. There’s been a long term axiom that 20% of the games are auto-wins, 20% are auto-losses, and the remaining 60% are what a player can influence.
 

As far as WG caring - the decision was made many years ago to go with random MM that is agnostic to player skill, while balancing the teams strictly by tank class and tier. This was done to minimize queue times while creating “equal” teams based on the tanks alone. It’s far easier to balance tanks than it is to balance player “skill”.

 

All of these things have been discussed in extensive detail on this thread so what you’re saying is not a new idea or concept.

Edited by j_rod, 04 July 2021 - 05:40 PM.

[watchmykneegrows]

j_rod, on 04 July 2021 - 05:38 PM, said:

Given that MM is random, there are absolutely going to be games where one team is statistically much stronger than the other team. Thing is, you’re equally likely to benefit from those games as be impacted negatively. There’s been a long term axiom that 20% of the games are auto-wins, 20% are auto-losses, and the remaining 60% are what a player can influence.
 

As far as WG caring - the decision was made many years ago to go with random MM that is agnostic to player skill, while balancing the teams strictly by tank class and tier. This was done to minimize queue times while creating “equal” teams based on the tanks alone. It’s far easier to balance tanks than it is to balance player “skill”.

 

All of these things have been discussed in extensive detail on this thread so what you’re saying is not a new idea or concept.

 

 

Here's the problem that I've had with war gaming's lack of giving a care. Its where teams either win or lose with 7 deaths and no kills or vice versa. 

 

I had a player on my team with almost 14k battles who did 0 damage with a wr of 31% players like that cripple the game for the team as they essentially become a worthless spot on a team requiring 7 players to actively play and participate. Those trash players are cancer to any team and wot doesn't care about them.

 

I've been in more matches with sub 45% wr or worse where they do more harm than good. On the lower tiers its easier to carry a team but on tiers 8 and above the joy of playing drops drastically with trash players being prevalent. And what is worse is the afk player. They are juat as bad as the lousy team-mate. 

 

On my old account where you could play against 3 tiers in a match the player skill was more evident and trash players weren't as prevalent as they are 6 years later.

Edited by watchmykneegrows, 05 July 2021 - 03:50 AM.

[j_rod]

watchmykneegrows, on 04 July 2021 - 09:49 PM, said:

 

 

Here's the problem that I've had with war gaming's lack of giving a care. Its where teams either win or lose with 7 deaths and no kills or vice versa. 

 

I had a player on my team with almost 14k battles who did 0 damage with a wr of 31% players like that cripple the game for the team as they essentially become a worthless spot on a team requiring 7 players to actively play and participate. Those trash players are cancer to any team and wot doesn't care about them.

 

I've been in more matches with sub 45% wr or worse where they do more harm than good. On the lower tiers its easier to carry a team but on tiers 8 and above the joy of playing drops drastically with trash players being prevalent. And what is worse is the afk player. They are juat as bad as the lousy team-mate. 

 

On my old account where you could play against 3 tiers in a match the player skill was more evident and trash players weren't as prevalent as they are 6 years later.

Most of us would agree that players below a certain threshold should be removed from the queue. Historically, the issue has been that NA hasn’t had enough played to form a separate queue for these types of players.

 

As for the blow outs - no amount of MM will change that. There seems to be this false equivalency with disparity in team skills and blow outs, but the reality is that blowouts happen no matter what.

[__V_O_P__]

watchmykneegrows, on 04 July 2021 - 12:10 PM, said:

I've been playing this game on my current account for over 2 years. I had a previous account back when the game was less than a year old as well and lost it when the device broke.

 

One thing I'll say is that the match making process is absolutely the worst feature of the game and the reason why I'm selling my current account.

 

I've sat down and done the math and it was easy to figure out how the wins and losses are affected by the match making process. First thing I did was add up the win rates from both teams and then divide that number by 7. That gave the overall win rate for the team of that match. I would play games where the win rate average would be plus or minus 10% on the average. Meaning that if your team had the higher win rate average then more than likely you were going to win the match. I've played in matches where the overall win rates average between two teams differed as much as 20%. Basically simple math and simple algorithms can be used to fix the match making process. But wot blitz doesn't care about that. The game is heavily unbalanced with every match. If the balance is in your team favor odds are that you will win. And vice versa if the odds aren't in your favor. I've only encountered a handful of games out of the 13 thousand matches I've played where the 2 teams of 7 players are balanced enough where it could be considered a good match. 

 

Of course other things to take into account would be average damage per game, average tier played,  tank type played. But that isn't the crux of the problem for many players that leave negative feedback on the game.

it seems like you don’t understand match making.
 

it matches tank types. that’s what it does. that’s pretty much all it does. that’s what Wargaming says it does. and it does that.
 

why should it match players on the basis of win rate damage per battle or anything else?

 

matching making criteria like win rate would reward bad players and punish good players. why would you want that? 

 

match makers sole purpose is to get 14 players into two teams with similar tank types and tiers. it does that. 
 

most of the problems are with the content of match making - ie the players. that pretty much is the biggest problem.
 

if you can conceive of a match making process that balances teams, guarantees close games, and rewards good play then please DM me so I can use it and become rich.

[watchmykneegrows]

__V_O_P__, on 05 July 2021 - 04:44 AM, said:

it seems like you don’t understand match making.
 

it matches tank types. that’s what it does. that’s pretty much all it does. that’s what Wargaming says it does. and it does that.
 

why should it match players on the basis of win rate damage per battle or anything else?

 

matching making criteria like win rate would reward bad players and punish good players. why would you want that? 

 

match makers sole purpose is to get 14 players into two teams with similar tank types and tiers. it does that. 
 

most of the problems are with the content of match making - ie the players. that pretty much is the biggest problem.
 

if you can conceive of a match making process that balances teams, guarantees close games, and rewards good play then please DM me so I can use it and become rich.

I understand matchmaking and understood it back in 2016 when the game would have battles with 3 tiers of tanks instead of 2. The matchmaking process is virtually the same as it was when the game first came out. The only balance is that certain amounts of each tank is to be had on a team and equal amount for each team.

 

The math is there and its simple really. If they match a team up with a higher overall win rate then baised on that alone the chances of winning goes up drastically for that team. So the solution would be to match up teams more evenly regarding win rates. If the player is garbage the game can filter them out of the regular battle queue. 

 

There are a good amount of players who have thousands of battles and win rates that are well below 40%. Those players consistently have demonstrated poor teamwork, poor decision making, and little to no help for the team. And in a game of 7 players that really can have a negative outcome on the battlefield. In matches where its a landslide win 7 to 0 its easy to see where the lack of performance was and its consistently with the bad/terrible players. So the terrible players continue to be trash and have a negative impact on the players who do better in matches.

 

Those players can be easily removed from the battle queue during matchmaking process or restricted etc. 

 

So why not make adjustments to the matchmaking process? 

 

The wot blitz game has been downloaded 100 million times and there are enough players that Wargaming can make improvements to the matchmaking process. But instead Wargaming continues to ignore what thousands of others have asked Wargaming to fix.

[__V_O_P__]

watchmykneegrows, on 06 July 2021 - 01:10 PM, said:

I understand matchmaking and understood it back in 2016 when the game would have battles with 3 tiers of tanks instead of 2. The matchmaking process is virtually the same as it was when the game first came out. The only balance is that certain amounts of each tank is to be had on a team and equal amount for each team.

 

The math is there and its simple really. #1 If they match a team up with a higher overall win rate then baised on that alone the chances of winning goes up drastically for that team. So the solution would be to match up teams more evenly regarding win rates. If the player is garbage the game can filter them out of the regular battle queue. 

 

#2 There are a good amount of players who have thousands of battles and win rates that are well below 40%. Those players consistently have demonstrated poor teamwork, poor decision making, and little to no help for the team. And in a game of 7 players that really can have a negative outcome on the battlefield. #3 In matches where its a landslide win 7 to 0 its easy to see where the lack of performance was and its consistently with the bad/terrible players. So the terrible players continue to be trash and have a negative impact on the players who do better in matches.

 

Those players can be easily removed from the battle queue during matchmaking process or restricted etc. 

 

#4 So why not make adjustments to the matchmaking process? 

 

The wot blitz game has been downloaded 100 million times and there are enough players that Wargaming can make improvements to the matchmaking process. #5 But instead Wargaming continues to ignore what thousands of others have asked Wargaming to fix.

 

#1 if teams are constructed on the basis of their win rates, then EVERYONE'S win rate will trend towards 50%. That's maths... and that's really simple. Stop being simple.

 

#2 So you wish to remove thousands of players from the queue... and you want to play only with other players who are around your level of ability? partly that sounds like Ratings... and your level of ability is what now? you're sub50% at tier 8 and above... are you part of that lower ability group? Or do we base this revised MM on your recent stats? 58%? Does it matter that nearly 70% of your 30 day games are in the Annihilator?  

 

#3 Landslides happen in top tier tournament play, which doesn't have any MM... What do you think about that? Are they bad players? And bad players are bad players NOT because of MM... partly they are bad because WG let's them become bad... partly they are bad because they don't care to be good. I win because of bad players. if everyone was like Fatness, I would have stopped years ago.

 

#4 why not make changes to other things? why not incentivize players to learn the game? why not include bonuses for playing tank type? Spotting for lights.... bouncing for Heavies... damage for Tds? Changes to MM would just mask the poor quality of the player base. they are at best a bandaid.

 

#5 stop asking for things to change when you haven't thought through the consequences of what you are asking to be changed.

Edited by __V_O_P__, 06 July 2021 - 06:30 PM.

[j_rod]

VOP - this feel like deja vu to you?

 

Watchmykneesgrow - it's honestly hard to take you seriously when you've played 242 out of your last 349 games in the Annihilator. So on top of playing the most broken tank in game, you want "better" (read: easier for you) MM as well?

Edited by j_rod, 06 July 2021 - 07:25 PM.

[_Crusader6_]

Complains about MM, does less damage in his Garborator broken tank that I do in the tier 6 Bltz9000 medium.  
    This is rich.  
 

 

[Bellatormonk]

_Crusader6_, on 06 July 2021 - 08:20 PM, said:

Complains about MM, does less damage in his Garborator broken tank that I do in the tier 6 Bltz9000 medium.  
    This is rich.  
 

 

See the Annalator isn't broken in the hands in the average person who's account name is a blatant play on words.

[_Crusader6_]

Bellatormonk, on 07 July 2021 - 12:57 PM, said:

See the Annalator isn't broken in the hands in the average person who's account name is a blatant play on words.

I thought the name was just a sad attempt by a child to prove he can be a tough guy racist. 
 

[j_rod]

_Crusader6_, on 07 July 2021 - 01:55 PM, said:

I thought the name was just a sad attempt by a child to prove he can be a tough guy racist. 
 

 

I completely missed the pun till you pointed it out... doh! 

[watchmykneegrows]

This is rich. The thread goes back 3 years and 87 pages so far. Several suggestions have been made by several users to fix or improvethe matchmakingprocess. Other users attack users for suggestions to MM and then go back to the circle jerk that has been going on in this thread for 3 years. 

 

And to top it off calling me tough guy racist lol. You guys are hilarious. Stay classy ma dudes

[__V_O_P__]

watchmykneegrows, on 11 July 2021 - 10:40 AM, said:

This is rich. The thread goes back 3 years and 87 pages so far. Several suggestions have been made by several users to fix or improvethe matchmakingprocess. Other users attack users for suggestions to MM and then go back to the circle jerk that has been going on in this thread for 3 years. 

 

And to top it off calling me tough guy racist lol. You guys are hilarious. Stay classy ma dudes

I’ll jump in here before you get put into timeout - the several suggestions you mention usually orientate around the “teams should be balanced on win rate / skill”. As has been argued repeatedly - skill based mm rewards bad players by giving them better team mates and punishes good players by giving them bad players. since quite a few of us have seen this suggestion over and over - you can imagine that it is fairly easy to refute it. The other argument - is that it’s a “team” problem not a “me” one. But since we all get the same teams this is also a fairly simple argument to dismiss. And then of course there’s your name. which refers to watching black people and therefore is at best in poor taste. 

Edited by __V_O_P__, 11 July 2021 - 03:51 PM.

[_Crusader6_]

watchmykneegrows, on 11 July 2021 - 10:40 AM, said:

This is rich. The thread goes back 3 years and 87 pages so far. Several suggestions have been made by several users to fix or improvethe matchmakingprocess. Other users attack users for suggestions to MM and then go back to the circle jerk that has been going on in this thread for 3 years. 

 

And to top it off calling me tough guy racist lol. You guys are hilarious. Stay classy ma dudes

I’m pretty sure it was wannabe tough guy racist.  You may want to consider a name change if that wasn’t your intent. 

    You don’t see good players making MM rants — so there is a common denominator about the complaints. 
 As VOP pointed out, everyone’s stats are visible and as a result it’s pretty clear case of cause and effect. 

You seem to think that people get attacked for making suggestions, just pointing out facts is not attacking them.  
    Very few people (any actually?) have had any practical, or well thought out improvement ideas to MM.  

 

Very few of us think MM is perfect, many of us don’t like the way WG does tank type matching in MM, but there are several differences of opinion on that.   The difference is most of us can discuss that sensibly.  
 

 
 

 

 

[THERebrth]

_Crusader6_, on 11 July 2021 - 10:44 AM, said:

I’m pretty sure it was wannabe tough guy racist.  You may want to consider a name change if that wasn’t your intent. 

    You don’t see good players making MM rants — so there is a common denominator about the complaints. 
 As VOP pointed out, everyone’s stats are visible and as a result it’s pretty clear case of cause and effect. 

You seem to think that people get attacked for making suggestions, just pointing out facts is not attacking them.  
    Very few people (any actually?) have had any practical, or well thought out improvement ideas to MM.  

 

Very few of us think MM is perfect, many of us don’t like the way WG does tank type matching in MM, but there are several differences of opinion on that.   The difference is most of us can discuss that sensibly.  
 

 
 

 

 

yup, the only major flaw in the mm right now is tank type matching

[Rou_Garou]

I've read that WG was including the strength of tanks when matching tanks.  I could see benefits but what would it do to queue times.  

Things get real when you have an anni platoon and a smasher on red and green may have only one of those freaks.