Jump to content


Official Matchmaking Discussion Thread


  • Please log in to reply
1946 replies to this topic

__V_O_P__ #1801 Posted 11 October 2021 - 01:46 PM

    A Lapsed Pacifist

  • Players
  • 62628 battles
  • 2,492
  • [LAP]
  • Member since:
    09-06-2016

View Postsl4b, on 10 October 2021 - 09:29 PM, said:

ik ik, not another MM thread. But I want to provide some thoughts that I haven't seen talked about much (or please correct me if they have). I'll be brief. 

 

1. Experience. I---and judging from the constant state of discontent among the community, most---get some insanely bad streaks of teams, regularly. Last night I lost 6 in a row. The chances of a 50/50 coin flip going the same way all 6 times are 1.56%. And that's not even taking into account that I am a lot better than an avg player and did top dmg every time. So in reality it must be way less than 1%. Yet losing 6 battles in a row isn't even that many, or that weird (which I know you all relate to). The point being, the MM is far too streaky to be as random as advertised. 1% chance outcomes should not be occurring once a week (1/7) or even once a month (1/30). Yet we see that they are. What other explanation is there?(Please correct any missteps in logic here). 

 

2. Incentive. This one is more interesting. I always hear the streamers (i.e. people profiting off the game) speak to the effect of "lol you think WG cares enough to rig the MM against YOU? Git Gud loser!!1". Rightttt. Ok, I  grant that WG doesn't have any incentive to wreck my personal stats. However, we all know what their incentive IS. They are greedy as all hell. It's apparent in every aspect of the game. They are waging psychological warfare on your dopamine receptors with all the (totally unnecessary) currencies, points, offers, crates, etc. Their tactics include gambling, false advertising, overcharging in order to later give the illusion of 'deals', over-the-top statkeeping--causing you to monitor performance, and keeping you in a constant state of 'work' toward some reward. The illusion of progress. So the very simple question is, if the entire game is designed to farm your cash, why WOULDN'T the MM be set up to do so as well?

 

How? By incorporating data like how long you've played, how much you play, how much you pay, what you pay for, how much skill you've developed, etc. Maybe give new and f2p players solid teams that get them hooked, give occasional buyers decent enough teams to convert them into regular buyers, give addicts the absolute dreg teams since their money is already in hand regardless. I can hardly guess the specifics because I'm not versed in the psychology of addiction, but it's all so obvious. The MM isn't rigged against you personally, it's rigged against the type of player you are. The deeper you get in, the more MM can and will abuse you. They are putting significant psychological research into every other part of the game, with no moral regard, so why on earth would MM be an exception? Ask yourself why the game even depends so wholly on this secretive MM algorithm? Why not let people simply join public servers and play with whomever they want, if it's all so random?

 

Very interested to hear arguments against these, particularly #2.  Also, given that the game is rigged, I think it's okay, provided that you recognize it as such as thus don't bother keeping track of stats.  It's still a wonder of gameplay mechanics, history, and math that can obviously be pretty fun.

 

edit: inb4 'banned: he knows too much!'

 

[ Moved to Official MM Thread ] Mod1

 

 

 


Ooooooh MATHS!

 

On point 1: For some proportion of your games you are in the new player queue (<5k total battles). That aside, so let's just say that a player wins and loses with equal probability (50:50), then in around 200 games you'd expect to see at least one 6 losing streak around 80% of the time. Or put another way, you'd be surprised if you didn't see one every 200 games. You mentioned the likelihood of seeing one in a week or a month, but actually this all depends on how many battles you played, not the time over which you played. If you're playing 200 battles in a month and I'm playing 800 battles (and we're both 50:50) then I'm seeing more win and loss streaks than you.

 

On point 2: because Occam's Razer. MM's main purpose is to get players playing. It wants to do that quickly, so that WG can farm your dopamine (as you put it). So why complicate MM and try to stack one team? That would require knowing everyone's win rate (and streak rate quite possibly for a tank or tier or... - and you also think "how long you've played, how much you play, how much you pay, what you pay for, how much skill you've developed&quot;) It would be so much easier to get players into battle quickly, and screw around with them there (say with personalised RNG)? 

 

And then finally, on your point about NOT bothering about stats... I rarely think "WOW WG robbed me" I frequently think "WOW what a bunch of useless team mates I had" or "Gosh, I really wish I hadn't traded early on..." 


Edited by __V_O_P__, 11 October 2021 - 01:46 PM.


sl4b #1802 Posted 11 October 2021 - 04:35 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Players
  • 3995 battles
  • 51
  • Member since:
    03-15-2020

View Post_YSoSerious, on 11 October 2021 - 04:37 AM, said:

 

Basically this, and for OP a severe lack of understanding of how statistics work. Don't worry, OP, we humans are ill-equipped to handle big numbers and phenomena. If we don't have the answer, our minds conjure up anything that seems reasonable and just go with it. It boggles the mind how a few extremely intelligent people keep all of humanity from going back to cave dwellings and witch hunts-barely.

 

Usually when you claim someone has a misunderstanding, you point out what it is. You know, instead of making an insanely idiotic remark generalizing all of human society.



sl4b #1803 Posted 11 October 2021 - 04:42 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Players
  • 3995 battles
  • 51
  • Member since:
    03-15-2020

View Post__V_O_P__, on 11 October 2021 - 01:46 PM, said:


Ooooooh MATHS!

 

On point 1: For some proportion of your games you are in the new player queue (<5k total battles). That aside, so let's just say that a player wins and loses with equal probability (50:50), then in around 200 games you'd expect to see at least one 6 losing streak around 80% of the time. Or put another way, you'd be surprised if you didn't see one every 200 games. You mentioned the likelihood of seeing one in a week or a month, but actually this all depends on how many battles you played, not the time over which you played. If you're playing 200 battles in a month and I'm playing 800 battles (and we're both 50:50) then I'm seeing more win and loss streaks than you.

 

On point 2: because Occam's Razer. MM's main purpose is to get players playing. It wants to do that quickly, so that WG can farm your dopamine (as you put it). So why complicate MM and try to stack one team? That would require knowing everyone's win rate (and streak rate quite possibly for a tank or tier or... - and you also think "how long you've played, how much you play, how much you pay, what you pay for, how much skill you've developed&quot;) It would be so much easier to get players into battle quickly, and screw around with them there (say with personalised RNG)? 

 

And then finally, on your point about NOT bothering about stats... I rarely think "WOW WG robbed me" I frequently think "WOW what a bunch of useless team mates I had" or "Gosh, I really wish I hadn't traded early on..." 

 

I get what you're saying. I don't play a lot, roughly 10 battles a day, so a 6 game losing streak when I'm carrying the team each game seems like it should be way more out of the ordinary than it is in practice. That was my point, using an example to draw a conclusion, not hard statistical analysis.

 

As to why stack MM, I explained why. To get f2p players paying. It would not be hard at all to incorporate winrate, buyrate, etc. into the MM (and selectively discard that info if the wait becomes too long). Personalized RNG is an interesting thought but would seem easier to expose.

 

 


Edited by sl4b, 11 October 2021 - 04:47 PM.


sl4b #1804 Posted 11 October 2021 - 04:47 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Players
  • 3995 battles
  • 51
  • Member since:
    03-15-2020

View Postj_rod, on 11 October 2021 - 03:36 AM, said:

Why would we respond to these points here when they’ve already been discussed in detail on the official MM thread?

The only thing I’ll tell you is that it’s relatively easily to see if there’s thing non-random going on based on whatever factor you want to measure (team avg winrate as an example) given a large enough data set, and this work has already been done multiple times with it being proven out time and again that MM is agnostic to player attributes.

 

I'll delve into this thread further then because that kind of work would interest me. Thanks.



j_rod #1805 Posted 11 October 2021 - 04:53 PM

    Quit being a Karen!

  • Players
  • 34992 battles
  • 4,539
  • [III-C]
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011

View Postsl4b, on 11 October 2021 - 10:42 AM, said:

 

I get what you're saying. I don't play a lot, roughly 10 battles a day, so a 6 game losing streak when I'm carrying the team each game seems like it should be way more out of the ordinary than it is in practice. That was my point, using an example to draw a conclusion, not hard statistical analysis.

 

As to why stack MM, I explained why. To get f2p players paying. It would not be hard at all to incorporate winrate, buyrate, etc. into the MM (and selectively discard that info if the wait becomes too long). Personalized RNG is an interesting thought but would seem easier to expose.

 

If other people have run huge statistical studies on the MM, as someone claimed, then yeah Ill have to delve into this thread to learn more.

 

 


A 6 game losing streak isn’t a stretch and as we can see from your Blitzstars, it doesn’t happen very frequently. From all signs, you had a run of bad teams and decided that it must be because something was rigged against you, which isn’t a logical response. 

 

To Ysoserious’ point, your post shows a lack of understanding regarding how statistics works and therefore, it’s hard to take your points seriously. Everyone has bad runs and everyone can point to anecdotes, but the reality is that 1) good players consistently overcome the MM regardless how bad it is and 2) anecdotes do not prove a point. 

 

Lastly, your point about stacking MM also shows that you aren’t really thinking through your point. Aside from VOP’s point regarding Occam’s Razer (which is valid), to actually stack teams means that WG would have to first quantify skill (WR alone isn’t enough) and then use that number as a way of skewing the teams one way or another. That is challenging enough in and of itself, but it would also add another consideration for MM, thus slowing down our queue times which is a killer. Additionally, assuming we could figure out how they were quantifying skill, we could then run a regression analysis to see if the MM truly wasn’t random. We’ve already done that for winrate and showed that the only time that MM has been skewed has been in special game modes, never for pub matches. 


Eventually given an infinite number of typewriters and an infinite number of Monkeys, they will come up with the complete works of Shakespeare. - C6 articulating the Infinite Monkey Theorem
It was never fair... but it was fun! - Krietenstein34 

https://www.verywellmind.com/an-overview-of-the-dunning-kruger-effect-4160740

 

 


dangerousdan26 #1806 Posted 12 October 2021 - 06:00 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Players
  • 38186 battles
  • 78
  • Member since:
    06-14-2018

View Postj_rod, on 11 October 2021 - 04:53 PM, said:


A 6 game losing streak isn’t a stretch and as we can see from your Blitzstars, it doesn’t happen very frequently. From all signs, you had a run of bad teams and decided that it must be because something was rigged against you, which isn’t a logical response. 

 

To Ysoserious’ point, your post shows a lack of understanding regarding how statistics works and therefore, it’s hard to take your points seriously. Everyone has bad runs and everyone can point to anecdotes, but the reality is that 1) good players consistently overcome the MM regardless how bad it is and 2) anecdotes do not prove a point. 

 

Lastly, your point about stacking MM also shows that you aren’t really thinking through your point. Aside from VOP’s point regarding Occam’s Razer (which is valid), to actually stack teams means that WG would have to first quantify skill (WR alone isn’t enough) and then use that number as a way of skewing the teams one way or another. That is challenging enough in and of itself, but it would also add another consideration for MM, thus slowing down our queue times which is a killer. Additionally, assuming we could figure out how they were quantifying skill, we could then run a regression analysis to see if the MM truly wasn’t random. We’ve already done that for winrate and showed that the only time that MM has been skewed has been in special game modes, never for pub matches. 

Are you in the employ of WOTB?

I would welcome an extra few seconds to create fairer matches

 

 


Edited by dangerousdan26, 12 October 2021 - 06:01 AM.


j_rod #1807 Posted 12 October 2021 - 10:58 AM

    Quit being a Karen!

  • Players
  • 34992 battles
  • 4,539
  • [III-C]
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011

View Postdangerousdan26, on 12 October 2021 - 12:00 AM, said:

Are you in the employ of WOTB?

I would welcome an extra few seconds to create fairer matches


Cool story. That said, there’s data that shows the importance of queue times in a mobile game so while you may be ok with it, many wouldn’t.

 

Just stick to seal clubbing and you’ll be fine.


Eventually given an infinite number of typewriters and an infinite number of Monkeys, they will come up with the complete works of Shakespeare. - C6 articulating the Infinite Monkey Theorem
It was never fair... but it was fun! - Krietenstein34 

https://www.verywellmind.com/an-overview-of-the-dunning-kruger-effect-4160740

 

 


_Crusader6_ #1808 Posted 12 October 2021 - 01:19 PM

    Why oh why do folks go Town?

  • Players
  • 80371 battles
  • 19,145
  • [III]
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

View Postdangerousdan26, on 12 October 2021 - 01:00 AM, said:

Are you in the employ of WOTB?

I would welcome an extra few seconds to create fairer matches

 

 


What is fair? 
   Fair to you may not be fair to me, etc.  

 

 


 


I hate Annihilator spammers...  
Tank Hoarder: 476 tanks in Garage:  489/493 Played Tanks Aced
 
 
I need more tanks...
 
    Wallet Warrior: Loyal Original M60 owner
 

 


__V_O_P__ #1809 Posted 12 October 2021 - 02:17 PM

    A Lapsed Pacifist

  • Players
  • 62628 battles
  • 2,492
  • [LAP]
  • Member since:
    09-06-2016

View Postdangerousdan26, on 12 October 2021 - 01:00 AM, said:

Are you in the employ of WOTB?

I would welcome an extra few seconds to create fairer matches

 

 


The issue of fairness can be problematic. For many people fair means that they have an improved chance of winning a battle. Presently MM balances on the basis the tanks (or at least attempts to). Fair battles can mean ensuring that the teams are balanced with respect to the win rate or some other measure of the quality the players selected on each team. Long story short - and discussed in earlier posts - balancing by win rates (or other) eventually just drives everyone’s win rates to 50%. This punishes good players for being good and rewards bad players for being bad. 



sl4b #1810 Posted 12 October 2021 - 04:21 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Players
  • 3995 battles
  • 51
  • Member since:
    03-15-2020

View Postj_rod, on 11 October 2021 - 04:53 PM, said:


A 6 game losing streak isn’t a stretch and as we can see from your Blitzstars, it doesn’t happen very frequently. From all signs, you had a run of bad teams and decided that it must be because something was rigged against you, which isn’t a logical response. 

 

To Ysoserious’ point, your post shows a lack of understanding regarding how statistics works and therefore, it’s hard to take your points seriously. Everyone has bad runs and everyone can point to anecdotes, but the reality is that 1) good players consistently overcome the MM regardless how bad it is and 2) anecdotes do not prove a point. 

 

Lastly, your point about stacking MM also shows that you aren’t really thinking through your point. Aside from VOP’s point regarding Occam’s Razer (which is valid), to actually stack teams means that WG would have to first quantify skill (WR alone isn’t enough) and then use that number as a way of skewing the teams one way or another. That is challenging enough in and of itself, but it would also add another consideration for MM, thus slowing down our queue times which is a killer. Additionally, assuming we could figure out how they were quantifying skill, we could then run a regression analysis to see if the MM truly wasn’t random. We’ve already done that for winrate and showed that the only time that MM has been skewed has been in special game modes, never for pub matches. 

 

You're really twisting my words. In actuality, I had a very bad run of teams and decided to look up how rare that should be, if the games can be considered a 50/50 flip. And I decided that, after playing thousands of battles, rare streaks and horrible days occur far too often in this game. That is a logical inference, even though it is based on induction and not hard mathematical proof. 

 

My statements about WGs incentive are the crux and I have yet to hear any argument against them other than 'it would be too hard... wait times...'. How do you know? I've waited several minutes often when it says there are 30+ players in my tier to start a game... why? Those numbers in the queue may have no connection to reality whatsoever. Besides, the whole point of an algorithm is to process a lot of data very fast. We already know they are collecting all that data since they shove it down our throats on our profile page, making it a badge of honor or shame for everyone.

 

Can you at least link some of the regression analyses you mentioned? Do any measure performance as a function of money spent on the game?

 

 


Edited by sl4b, 12 October 2021 - 04:22 PM.


j_rod #1811 Posted 12 October 2021 - 04:31 PM

    Quit being a Karen!

  • Players
  • 34992 battles
  • 4,539
  • [III-C]
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011

View Postsl4b, on 12 October 2021 - 10:21 AM, said:

 

You're really twisting my words. In actuality, I had a very bad run of teams and decided to look up how rare that should be, if the games can be considered a 50/50 flip. And I decided that, after playing thousands of battles, rare streaks and horrible days occur far too often in this game. That is a logical inference, even though it is based on induction and not hard mathematical proof. 

 

My statements about WGs incentive are the crux and I have yet to hear any argument against them other than 'it would be too hard... wait times...'. How do you know? I've waited several minutes often when it says there are 30+ players in my tier to start a game... why? Those numbers in the queue may have no connection to reality whatsoever. Besides, the whole point of an algorithm is to process a lot of data very fast. We already know they are collecting all that data since they shove it down our throats on our profile page, making it a badge of honor or shame for everyone.

 

Can you at least link some of the regression analyses you mentioned? Do any measure performance as a function of money spent on the game?

 

 


You know you could actually go back and just read past posts right?

 

http://forum.wotblitz.eu/index.php?/topic/55933-rigging-mm-in-regular-battles/


Eventually given an infinite number of typewriters and an infinite number of Monkeys, they will come up with the complete works of Shakespeare. - C6 articulating the Infinite Monkey Theorem
It was never fair... but it was fun! - Krietenstein34 

https://www.verywellmind.com/an-overview-of-the-dunning-kruger-effect-4160740

 

 


__V_O_P__ #1812 Posted 12 October 2021 - 05:06 PM

    A Lapsed Pacifist

  • Players
  • 62628 battles
  • 2,492
  • [LAP]
  • Member since:
    09-06-2016

View Postj_rod, on 12 October 2021 - 11:31 AM, said:


You know you could actually go back and just read past posts right?

 

http://forum.wotblitz.eu/index.php?/topic/55933-rigging-mm-in-regular-battles/


thumpers mummy JRod. 



Droodles_Little_Noodle #1813 Posted 12 October 2021 - 07:22 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 2233 battles
  • 820
  • Member since:
    02-07-2021

mm really doesn't decide if you're going to win or lose. its your team, so honestly. get good scrub. I play on nintendo switch and stilll rek the reds and carry my stoopid team.


Edited by Droodles_Little_Noodle, 12 October 2021 - 07:22 PM.

Unicum, Don't Unicum

Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift. That is why it is called the present.

The more you take, the less you have.

 


Droodles_Little_Noodle #1814 Posted 12 October 2021 - 07:25 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 2233 battles
  • 820
  • Member since:
    02-07-2021

View Postsl4b, on 11 October 2021 - 09:42 AM, said:

 

I get what you're saying. I don't play a lot, roughly 10 battles a day, so a 6 game losing streak when I'm carrying the team each game seems like it should be way more out of the ordinary than it is in practice. That was my point, using an example to draw a conclusion, not hard statistical analysis.

 

As to why stack MM, I explained why. To get f2p players paying. It would not be hard at all to incorporate winrate, buyrate, etc. into the MM (and selectively discard that info if the wait becomes too long). Personalized RNG is an interesting thought but would seem easier to expose.

 

 

 I don't think thats really possible tho. Think about this. If it did exist. We'd know it'd exist because meadsy69 would get the best of the best teams. and watching his streams i don't think he ever gets good teams


Unicum, Don't Unicum

Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift. That is why it is called the present.

The more you take, the less you have.

 


wrecker1968 #1815 Posted 13 October 2021 - 12:21 AM

    Head of Security

  • Players
  • 60788 battles
  • 2,656
  • [HOUSE]
  • Member since:
    04-13-2016

Employed by WG?............mmmmm

 I wonder if any of these guys have the same IP address?.....................mmmmmmm

 This has been going since 2017 and Most of the naysayers have Disappeared over time. But A lot of the same old defenders are still here.........mmmmmm



j_rod #1816 Posted 13 October 2021 - 12:36 AM

    Quit being a Karen!

  • Players
  • 34992 battles
  • 4,539
  • [III-C]
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011

View Postwrecker1968, on 12 October 2021 - 06:21 PM, said:

Employed by WG?............mmmmm

 I wonder if any of these guys have the same IP address?.....................mmmmmmm

 This has been going since 2017 and Most of the naysayers have Disappeared over time. But A lot of the same old defenders are still here.........mmmmmm


We’re not defending WG. Many of us, myself included, think that WG does some very questionable things - gambling crates, not addressing problem players, etc. The whole MM isn’t fair trope just isn’t one of them and it’s the same tired conversation.


Eventually given an infinite number of typewriters and an infinite number of Monkeys, they will come up with the complete works of Shakespeare. - C6 articulating the Infinite Monkey Theorem
It was never fair... but it was fun! - Krietenstein34 

https://www.verywellmind.com/an-overview-of-the-dunning-kruger-effect-4160740

 

 


sl4b #1817 Posted 13 October 2021 - 01:08 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Players
  • 3995 battles
  • 51
  • Member since:
    03-15-2020

View Postj_rod, on 13 October 2021 - 12:36 AM, said:


We’re not defending WG. Many of us, myself included, think that WG does some very questionable things - gambling crates, not addressing problem players, etc. The whole MM isn’t fair trope just isn’t one of them and it’s the same tired conversation.

 

The link you gave is from another forum kinda but thanks, I shall look into it. I'm not really hardcore into this community so forgive me for rehashing arguments you've had before.

 

A couple more useless anecdotes but they may help explain my position:

 

1. If i take a long break from the game, which happens frequently, when I come back I always have pretty good teams and win 70% or so. I'm usually rusty so you'd think it would be the other way around.

 

2. I play some tanks quite poorly and manage to get over 60%, such as when I was learning the soviet meds. I play others fantastically and cannot win. For instance, the Chimera that popped out of a battlepass crate for me. I was thrilled to get it until I realized that I can average 2200 dmg and still not win 60% because my team just disappears about a minute into most games. It's OP as hell yet not even fun to play with this MM.  Yes it is an anecdote because I'm not quantitatively measuring the performance of my teammates every battle, but I see a drastic difference in the Chimera vs. other tanks.

 

My main question to you is if you think WG is questionable in other areas, why would they be perfectly honest with the MM when it benefits them not to be?


Edited by sl4b, 13 October 2021 - 01:20 AM.


j_rod #1818 Posted 13 October 2021 - 01:23 AM

    Quit being a Karen!

  • Players
  • 34992 battles
  • 4,539
  • [III-C]
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011

View Postsl4b, on 12 October 2021 - 07:08 PM, said:

 

The link you gave is from another forum kinda but thanks, I shall look into it. I'm not really hardcore into this community so forgive me for rehashing arguments you've had before.

 

A couple more useless anecdotes but they may help explain my position:

 

1. If i take a long break from the game, which happens frequently, when I come back I always have pretty good teams and win 70% or so. I'm usually rusty so you'd think it would be the other way around.

 

2. I play some tanks quite poorly and manage to get over 60%, such as when I was learning the soviet meds. I play others fantastically and cannot win. For instance, the Chimera that popped out of a battlepass crate for me. I was thrilled to get it until I realized that I can average 2200 dmg and still not win 60% because my team just disappears about a minute into most games. It's OP as hell yet not even fun to play with this MM.  Yes it is an anecdote because I'm not quantitatively measuring the performance of my teammates every battle, but I see a drastic difference in the Chimera vs. other tanks.

 

My main question to you is if you think WG is questionable in other areas, why would they be perfectly honest with the MM when it benefits them not to be?


The impetus is on you to show that there is something happening. We shown that statistically that doesn’t bear out and arguing anecdotes is a foolish endeavor.


Eventually given an infinite number of typewriters and an infinite number of Monkeys, they will come up with the complete works of Shakespeare. - C6 articulating the Infinite Monkey Theorem
It was never fair... but it was fun! - Krietenstein34 

https://www.verywellmind.com/an-overview-of-the-dunning-kruger-effect-4160740

 

 


_YSoSerious #1819 Posted 13 October 2021 - 02:27 AM

    Serenity Now, Insanity Later

  • Players
  • 17497 battles
  • 1,435
  • Member since:
    08-07-2016

View Postsl4b, on 11 October 2021 - 08:35 AM, said:

 

Usually when you claim someone has a misunderstanding, you point out what it is. You know, instead of making an insanely idiotic remark generalizing all of human society.

 

Usually yes, but when the same theories keep popping in and out of forum existence, one doesn't bother to invest too much in rehashing old points. And I do mean old points, so much so that your anger issues mask the fact that you're the lazy one for not searching these issues, or at the very least looking this thread up, instead of being generously moved by our resident mod/retired mod. Not to mention that you're putting out theories with zero evidence to back it up. Or to quote a gem, "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."-The Hitch.

 

On the generalizing of human society, the evidence is overwhelming. Humans are creatures of emotions and avoid change at nearly all costs. For better or worse, we were not meant to contemplate big questions because our very brains make shite up on the fly to compensate for phenomena beyond our puny comprehension. Frankly, we owe our betterment to the few geniuses that outgrew our humble beginnings as a species. Humans went from Flat-Earthing, to Geocentrism, burning witches, to ...MM is rigged against you.

 

C'est la vie.



wrecker1968 #1820 Posted 13 October 2021 - 02:36 AM

    Head of Security

  • Players
  • 60788 battles
  • 2,656
  • [HOUSE]
  • Member since:
    04-13-2016
WG has admitted that they have algorithms that no one knows about. I honestly think they have have 1 or 2 that are tied into MM and RNG. What they do no one knows . And yes this is a tired conversation. It's their cat litter Box we are just using it.




4 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users