Jump to content


Official Matchmaking Discussion Thread


  • Please log in to reply
1090 replies to this topic

MG16 #661 Posted 15 July 2018 - 02:59 AM

    Private

  • Players
  • 25885 battles
  • 9
  • [HRNET]
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostBellatormonk, on 13 July 2018 - 01:48 PM, said:

So I never realized the full weight of Crew Skills effect on game play especially when those skill are Lvl7 and if I am reading some guides correctly (There is NO ingame explanation of Crew Skills to explain this function, at least that makes sense).  I mean I read the stats, etc and never really put much thought into them because I NEVER see them activate during a battle, only during replays so it never meant as much until I started watching top tier player replays and then my own in comparison. The replays on top tier show Crew Skills activating in rows almost non-stop on whatever class of tank they play.  It is seriously like watching some old MMO Raid Buff abilities lighting up and "magic" happens.

 

I was always wondering, how do people snap shot with a gun that size from across the map, how are they doing so much damage, etc, etc.  The light bulb came on watching replays and seeing rows of skills activate for players whom obviously have nearly every skill leveled to 7.

 

So if MM doesn't take into WR, perhaps it should be at the VERY least taking into account the Crew Skills trained and if Crew SP is not 100%.  Basically I no longer blame the players for the most part or wonder "how the hell did they crush us", I now realize the "magic" happening in steamrolls is:

 

-Player Skill

-Crew Skill

-Tank stats/capability (derpy gun/armor, etc)

-Crew XP at 100% or less

 

So for us normal people who did not pay to train X # of skills to 7 and do not pay gold to level a crew to 100% on purchase/research we are at a SEVERE disadvantage.  Perhaps that is the only fair way to MM?

 

 

That Precision Fire Skill does seem to affect my ability to win more battles as I get to max roll other opponents more often.

 



BAR_001 #662 Posted 16 July 2018 - 02:46 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 27222 battles
  • 2,030
  • [HAHA]
  • Member since:
    02-18-2017
MM changes on the way. What do ya'll think? Only 1 provision available for tier 4, not sure how I feel about those changes. Seems to me that being bottom tier at that tier already sucks, and it seems like motivation for nubz to climb tiers. Otherwise some of the changes to MM look interesting. 

TonnerreCadien #663 Posted 16 July 2018 - 05:31 PM

    Cabri dans le Maïs

  • Players
  • 44746 battles
  • 2,481
  • [HAHA]
  • Member since:
    05-23-2015

View PostBAR_001, on 16 July 2018 - 08:46 AM, said:

MM changes on the way. What do ya'll think? Only 1 provision available for tier 4, not sure how I feel about those changes. Seems to me that being bottom tier at that tier already sucks, and it seems like motivation for nubz to climb tiers. Otherwise some of the changes to MM look interesting. 

 

Every time I try to read the news item, my device crashes. I'd like to know what the heck they're planning. WG's idea of "fixing" things doesn't always make me a happy non-camper.

jx1pteO.jpg

I'm too old to be a seal clubber! I can't tell you the last time I even went to a club!

"Go back to tier III!" - Every stat-fetisher who ever got salty with me in post-game chat

Des fois ce jeu est laid comme un coin de banquette, laisses-mon te dire...


SpartacusDiablo #664 Posted 16 July 2018 - 05:40 PM

    Highly Illogical

  • Players
  • 25487 battles
  • 7,911
  • [III-R]
  • Member since:
    02-17-2014

View PostBAR_001, on 16 July 2018 - 09:46 AM, said:

MM changes on the way. What do ya'll think? Only 1 provision available for tier 4, not sure how I feel about those changes. Seems to me that being bottom tier at that tier already sucks, and it seems like motivation for nubz to climb tiers. Otherwise some of the changes to MM look interesting. 

I'm excited about the changes.  I've long seen an issue with how tanks are assigned per team.  Seeing 4 heavies vs 4 lights gets old.  I've also seen issues with the number of TD's in higher tier games.  I've seen matches where nine of the 14 tanks in a match are TD's.  If properly implemented I will be very happy to see these changes.


Find me on Discord, [SpartacusDiablo#7879]

Rest in Peace CJ.  You will be missed.


TonnerreCadien #665 Posted 16 July 2018 - 05:47 PM

    Cabri dans le Maïs

  • Players
  • 44746 battles
  • 2,481
  • [HAHA]
  • Member since:
    05-23-2015

View PostSpartacusDiablo, on 16 July 2018 - 11:40 AM, said:

I'm excited about the changes.  I've long seen an issue with how tanks are assigned per team.  Seeing 4 heavies vs 4 lights gets old.  I've also seen issues with the number of TD's in higher tier games.  I've seen matches where nine of the 14 tanks in a match are TD's.  If properly implemented I will be very happy to see these changes.

 

Well that's a change I could get behind, too. I'm just operating blind here because I can't read the doggone news item.

jx1pteO.jpg

I'm too old to be a seal clubber! I can't tell you the last time I even went to a club!

"Go back to tier III!" - Every stat-fetisher who ever got salty with me in post-game chat

Des fois ce jeu est laid comme un coin de banquette, laisses-mon te dire...


Bellatormonk #666 Posted 16 July 2018 - 07:38 PM

    Tinfoil Knight

  • Players
  • 28098 battles
  • 1,234
  • [MASHU]
  • Member since:
    04-12-2011

Can't happen soon enough.  Just did 10 matches, T8 with a 20% WR.  Teams full of 40%ers calling "town", or Is3 Defenders sitting at sniper spots literally sniping the entire match, CDCs that run right into the enemy vanguard and splode...  Reds of course full of 50%+ who simply steam rolled through the first 3-4 yolos in 60 secs and matches over in 2 mins.

 

--11thMatch:  500 Battle 38% AMX 13-75 sat behind my Borsig the entire match and blocked me.  Two others had gooseggs.  Reds...rolled us and my 3k dmg totaled more than my entire team added up.


Edited by Bellatormonk, 16 July 2018 - 07:54 PM.


__Crusader6__ #667 Posted 17 July 2018 - 12:32 AM

    Annoying Mod

  • Players
  • 59774 battles
  • 11,651
  • [-C6-]
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

View PostSpartacusDiablo, on 16 July 2018 - 12:40 PM, said:

I'm excited about the changes.  I've long seen an issue with how tanks are assigned per team.  Seeing 4 heavies vs 4 lights gets old.  I've also seen issues with the number of TD's in higher tier games.  I've seen matches where nine of the 14 tanks in a match are TD's.  If properly implemented I will be very happy to see these changes.

 

Other than balancing types, it won’t stop 9 TD’s in Tier 9-10 

   It simply means that one team has 5 the other 4, but only if the server pop is above 8k...

 

For NA, that means about 2-3 hours of this being implemented a day.   

 

 


 
Tank Hoarder: 384 tanks in Garage:  376/386 aced (Mk1 Heavy and T49A repo),    wallet warrior.  Loyal Original M60 owner
 
 
Sorry I haven’t aced the Smasher yet - So I’m still ruining tier 6-8 

 


Bellatormonk #668 Posted 19 July 2018 - 05:10 PM

    Tinfoil Knight

  • Players
  • 28098 battles
  • 1,234
  • [MASHU]
  • Member since:
    04-12-2011
So I have to ask from a stand point of "observational bias", does anyone else feel the MM seems to put you on better "weighted" teams in terms of tanks and skillful players when you are doing your dailies and then after that it's a free for all of baddies?  I mean it seems like I can get a near 100% WR on each tank/each daily.

Edited by Bellatormonk, 03 August 2018 - 02:50 AM.


Stgeorge28 #669 Posted 19 July 2018 - 07:34 PM

    Private

  • Players
  • 98611 battles
  • 6
  • Member since:
    09-04-2015

Sorry but enough is enough. MM is broken in this players opinion.

 

First I am retired and play a lot and have been around for a lot of the updates. Are there better players out yes for sure but I do ok. Here is my observation/issue.  Just got out of a tier 8 game where the red team had 4 players between 60-66% WR from high tier clans like COD, DD-R Union. We got trashed, WOT talked alot about competitive changes but 4 60+% really with as many 40% running around.

 

The game is changing and not for the better. When the game was new, it was very competitive many times going down to the last 2 tanks, and who got the next hit to win. Now more often than not one team or the other gets trashed 6/1 or 7/0. Here are some observations:

1. High tier will no longer call plan, a plan is left or right not “kill em all”.

2. If there is a call half the time the tm does not follow it

3. With so many low WR players they will not move up to help, I no longer look at my WR, I look at credits, currently at 61 million.

4. If I could make one rule to win it would be STAY TOGETHER. If you think about it, in the games where you got trashed or trashed the red tm, what do the games have in common? One tm stayed together the other did not.

 

Please do not tell me to carry harder, about a month ago playing tier 8 IS 5, first game a little over 4000hp, next game just over 3000hp and lost both. A lot of players I talk to on TS agree with the above. So here is my recommendation: MM should factor in WR, so that average WR of each tm is within 5 points of each other. On another issue is there is a growing number on players at tier 7 and above with a very low number of battles, I know WOT needs to make money, but you should be only able to buy a tank one tier higher than what you have researched on the tech tree.

 

thanks

 

St George28

 

PS I also rage a lot more than I used too, just don’t care anymore 



Bellatormonk #670 Posted 21 July 2018 - 01:39 AM

    Tinfoil Knight

  • Players
  • 28098 battles
  • 1,234
  • [MASHU]
  • Member since:
    04-12-2011

Is this working as intended?  Can you spot the normality?

 

https://imgur.com/a/GM1a8u7

 

-And another working as intended?

 

https://imgur.com/a/Zsu45c7

 


Edited by Bellatormonk, 23 July 2018 - 03:36 AM.


petrolhead63 #671 Posted 29 July 2018 - 11:15 PM

    Junior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 6273 battles
  • 125
  • [_VG_]
  • Member since:
    07-06-2017

View PostStgeorge28, on 19 July 2018 - 07:34 PM, said:

Sorry but enough is enough. MM is broken in this players opinion.

 

First I am retired and play a lot and have been around for a lot of the updates. Are there better players out yes for sure but I do ok. Here is my observation/issue.  Just got out of a tier 8 game where the red team had 4 players between 60-66% WR from high tier clans like COD, DD-R Union. We got trashed, WOT talked alot about competitive changes but 4 60+% really with as many 40% running around.

 

The game is changing and not for the better. When the game was new, it was very competitive many times going down to the last 2 tanks, and who got the next hit to win. Now more often than not one team or the other gets trashed 6/1 or 7/0. Here are some observations:

1. High tier will no longer call plan, a plan is left or right not “kill em all”.

2. If there is a call half the time the tm does not follow it

3. With so many low WR players they will not move up to help, I no longer look at my WR, I look at credits, currently at 61 million.

4. If I could make one rule to win it would be STAY TOGETHER. If you think about it, in the games where you got trashed or trashed the red tm, what do the games have in common? One tm stayed together the other did not.

 

Please do not tell me to carry harder, about a month ago playing tier 8 IS 5, first game a little over 4000hp, next game just over 3000hp and lost both. A lot of players I talk to on TS agree with the above. So here is my recommendation: MM should factor in WR, so that average WR of each tm is within 5 points of each other. On another issue is there is a growing number on players at tier 7 and above with a very low number of battles, I know WOT needs to make money, but you should be only able to buy a tank one tier higher than what you have researched on the tech tree.

 

thanks

 

St George28

 

PS I also rage a lot more than I used too, just don’t care anymore 

 

Couldn’t agree more. Just popped on to play a few games for some fun. Played 6 lost 5 (all of which I was top damage and without a 20 round auto loader couldn’t do anymore cos I ran out of meat shields....uh, I mean team mates) and won 1. The 5 losses were one way massacres. So was the win. That’s not fun. The MM imho causes 99% of the raging in game. If the teams were “more” balanced then there’d be a feeling of a more competitive chance so less raging. As it is it’s just pathetic. 

PS: edited to add, make that played 10, lost 9, won 1. 6 of those in a row. With teams that don’t have a clue what their tank is for, how to play the map or how to support. WG; your great plan for simplifying the game had better include some compulsory videos on how to play cos player knowledge is absolutely rock bottom. 


Edited by petrolhead63, 29 July 2018 - 11:42 PM.


Ravin_R26 #672 Posted 30 July 2018 - 03:36 PM

    Private

  • Players
  • 13223 battles
  • 4
  • [AU1]
  • Member since:
    02-04-2017

I'm sure this is a stupid (idea/question), but I'm going to say it anyway, because that's how I roll.

 

Does matchmaking consider certain tanks to be "below average" in value when calculating the value of a team (trying to make "balanced" teams)?

If the answer to that question is "yes," the next question would be, "Is it possible to identify those specific tanks?"

If the answer to both of the above questions is "yes," then would it make sense to become a master of one those tanks, theoretically bringing a decisive advantage to your team in every battle you play?

 

Yes, I'm talking about "gaming" matchmaking.  Is that possible?  Is it happening and people are already doing it?



SpartacusDiablo #673 Posted 30 July 2018 - 04:04 PM

    Highly Illogical

  • Players
  • 25487 battles
  • 7,911
  • [III-R]
  • Member since:
    02-17-2014

View PostGlacial_112, on 30 July 2018 - 10:36 AM, said:

I'm sure this is a stupid (idea/question), but I'm going to say it anyway, because that's how I roll.

 

Does matchmaking consider certain tanks to be "below average" in value when calculating the value of a team (trying to make "balanced" teams)?

If the answer to that question is "yes," the next question would be, "Is it possible to identify those specific tanks?"

If the answer to both of the above questions is "yes," then would it make sense to become a master of one those tanks, theoretically bringing a decisive advantage to your team in every battle you play?

 

Yes, I'm talking about "gaming" matchmaking.  Is that possible?  Is it happening and people are already doing it?

That question was answered in the first post in this thread.


Find me on Discord, [SpartacusDiablo#7879]

Rest in Peace CJ.  You will be missed.


Ravin_R26 #674 Posted 30 July 2018 - 08:00 PM

    Private

  • Players
  • 13223 battles
  • 4
  • [AU1]
  • Member since:
    02-04-2017

View PostSpartacusDiablo, on 30 July 2018 - 10:04 AM, said:

That question was answered in the first post in this thread.

 

What lazy response.  I understand the desire to make me look stupid, but I'm quite capable of doing that on my own, thank you very much.  However, I do not agree with your assessment.  If the first post had addressed my question, I wouldn't have asked it.  The only part that seems to remotely touch on what I'm asking about is this:

 

Block Quote

What criteria does MM consider in random battles?
MM consider balance weight that reflects overall efficiency of each vehicle. Balance weight depends on vehicles' tier - theefore, MM tries to form teams with equal number of vehicles with the same tier. 
MM doesn't consider:
- personal skill level;
- tank nation or class;
- crew mastery level;
- vehicle configuration (mounted modules, equipment, consumables);

- previous battles experience and outcome.

 

The above says, "MM consider balance weight that reflects overall efficiency of each vehicle."  This vaguely implies that I AM on to something.  The rest of the above goes on to dismiss all other factors other than tier - again, bolstering the argument for identifying specific vehicles that are considered "weak" in matchmaking, requiring MM to put stronger tanks on that team to maintain balance.



SpartacusDiablo #675 Posted 30 July 2018 - 08:31 PM

    Highly Illogical

  • Players
  • 25487 battles
  • 7,911
  • [III-R]
  • Member since:
    02-17-2014

View PostGlacial_112, on 30 July 2018 - 03:00 PM, said:

 

What lazy response.  I understand the desire to make me look stupid, but I'm quite capable of doing that on my own, thank you very much.  However, I do not agree with your assessment.  If the first post had addressed my question, I wouldn't have asked it.  The only part that seems to remotely touch on what I'm asking about is this:

 

 

The above says, "MM consider balance weight that reflects overall efficiency of each vehicle."  This vaguely implies that I AM on to something.  The rest of the above goes on to dismiss all other factors other than tier - again, bolstering the argument for identifying specific vehicles that are considered "weak" in matchmaking, requiring MM to put stronger tanks on that team to maintain balance.

It wasn't lazy at all.  You have to remember that the majority of the forum fails to read the post above theirs let alone looking for a answer before asking a question.  My apologies for assuming that you'd do the same.

 

The "weight" they speak of is purely the tier of the vehicle or platoon of vehicles in question.  If you are in a tier 7 there will most likely be a tier 7 against you.  If you are in a tier 7 platoon there will most likely be a platoon of tier 7's against you.  These rules go out the window when server population falls below a certain number.   That is the only thing currently considered.  That is why you see teams of five lights vs five heavies.  Now this is scheduled to change in 5.1 but only when server population is above 10k so basically it's not changing for NA.


Find me on Discord, [SpartacusDiablo#7879]

Rest in Peace CJ.  You will be missed.


Ravin_R26 #676 Posted 30 July 2018 - 09:47 PM

    Private

  • Players
  • 13223 battles
  • 4
  • [AU1]
  • Member since:
    02-04-2017

I do appreciate your patience with me, and your willingness to respond.  As far as "weight" goes, they're tier comment says, "balance weight depends on tier" of course is necessary, but I do not believe it means it is entirely tier.  If it did, then why do they begin that section with the wording, "MM consider balance weight that reflects overall efficiency of each vehicle."?  This tells me that wargaming assigns a value, probably simply a number between 0-100 to each vehicle, and an adder (or subtractor) is applied based on being upper tier or lower tier.

 

So is NA the smallest server for Blitz?  Makes sense.  The only reason I don't play more ranked games is because of the 15 minute wait to get into each one.

 

Anyway, I think you've answered my question to the best of both criterion of your ability and my ability to understand, lol.  Thank you.



SpartacusDiablo #677 Posted 30 July 2018 - 09:49 PM

    Highly Illogical

  • Players
  • 25487 battles
  • 7,911
  • [III-R]
  • Member since:
    02-17-2014

View PostGlacial_112, on 30 July 2018 - 04:47 PM, said:

I do appreciate your patience with me, and your willingness to respond.  As far as "weight" goes, they're tier comment says, "balance weight depends on tier" of course is necessary, but I do not believe it means it is entirely tier.  If it did, then why do they begin that section with the wording, "MM consider balance weight that reflects overall efficiency of each vehicle."?  This tells me that wargaming assigns a value, probably simply a number between 0-100 to each vehicle, and an adder (or subtractor) is applied based on being upper tier or lower tier.

 

So is NA the smallest server for Blitz?  Makes sense.  The only reason I don't play more ranked games is because of the 15 minute wait to get into each one.

 

Anyway, I think you've answered my question to the best of both criterion of your ability and my ability to understand, lol.  Thank you.

Long story short...  Because many of them speak English as a second language and sometimes there is bit of a language barrier between us.


Find me on Discord, [SpartacusDiablo#7879]

Rest in Peace CJ.  You will be missed.


trogvision #678 Posted 31 July 2018 - 03:08 AM

    Rushing B

  • Players
  • 19643 battles
  • 1,045
  • [ATO]
  • Member since:
    05-24-2013
Matchmaking is dragging me through the mud again. I know, I know, we all get the same matchmaking. I'm just going to try again tomorrow. :bajan:
Nobody likes AFK'ers.

Bellatormonk #679 Posted 05 August 2018 - 02:47 AM

    Tinfoil Knight

  • Players
  • 28098 battles
  • 1,234
  • [MASHU]
  • Member since:
    04-12-2011
Hills..greens spawn South.  5 of 7 tanks (one is TD so I give him that) sat in the spawn.  Me and 1 other heavy went to hill base to stop tide until we noticed..everyone else is in the base still.  Red takes hill and sends an RU251 and Chi into the water to flank.  Team dead in 2 mins.  All 5 were 47% or less.

BattChiefJoe241 #680 Posted 08 August 2018 - 04:17 AM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 10095 battles
  • 447
  • [MCFD]
  • Member since:
    12-02-2015

View PostStrigonx, on 01 December 2017 - 01:15 AM, said:

 

Maybe you're just bad and need to git gud?

 

You MIGHT be correct 

1017288795.png




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users