Jump to content

Worker42

Players
  • Content Сount

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    5526
  • Clan

    [VENOM]

About Worker42

  • Rank
    Able Seaman
  • Insignia
    [VENOM]
  1. Worker42

    Match Maker

    Thanks for the answers I don't agree with you, but at least you took the time to reply. I cannot see how it's possible for 80% of players to have a win rate under 50%, but then again WoT is a f***ed up game. (My win rate there is 51%) My main point is that a single player cannot, except in very rare heroic circumstances, turn around a game single handed (excepting World of Warplanes which lends itself to this sort of thing [61% win rate there]). You're therefore dependant on the 14 others the MM has grouped you with, and over the long term the others you play with should average out, bringing your win rate around the 50% mark. (You'll eventually have equal exposure to both good & bad players). Statistically this is what should happen in a series of random events; if this doesn't happen in Wargaming titles (and we agree that it doesn't) it's because the system isn't purely random, it's been manipulated in some way. That's not a bad thing, it's what the MM is supposed to do, but the fact that it can throw players so far from 50% after a reasonable sample size is taken suggests to me that something is wrong with it. A purely random system, say only blindly matching ship types, should produce 50% win rates (or thereabouts). I can imagine that 50% win rates aren't what Wargaming wants, it'd be boring for those who wish to excel, so they don't use a purely random system. C'est la vie, but for someone who gets stuck on the wrong side of the equation it's very frustrating. Good luck to you!
  2. Worker42

    Match Maker

    aboch, I'm setting you a challenge. Interested? What I'd like you to do is to attempt to rise above your very narrow considerations of me, and attempt to consider the actual issues I've raised. To put it simply, and I hope you can understand this, I DO NOT want you to play the man, but rather to play the ball (a football analogy I hope is familiar to you). Take me out of the equation, forget about me. Ask yourself the following questions: 1. How is it possible to have a 42.5% win rate in World of Warships? 2. What would someone have to do, statistically, to have such a win rate? 3. Would one player be able to effect events to such an extent that they materially affect the win rate, when measured as an average over more than 500 experiments? 4. Is it not true that, bearing in mind this is a zero sum game (for every winner there's a loser), even a bot, within a team of 15, will have a win rate close to 50%? 5. How many players, again bearing in mind this is a zero sum game, have a win rate of 42.5%? 6. How many players, again bearing in mind this is a zero sum game, have a win rate of 57.5%? 7. If the answers to questions 5 and 6 are not identical, why is this? 8. Is it possible, regardless of your pre-conceived notions, that the MM is not fit for purpose? Your answers to the above will determine whether I continue to share my insights with you . I hope you do the right thing, and are capable of thinking outside the box. Good Luck!
  3. Worker42

    Match Maker

    Hopefully a one off, but a good indication that there are issues. As pointed out above, I think the upcoming patch is a step in the right direction, but Wargaming cannot rest on their laurels, and need to keep on top of this. Good luck to you
  4. Worker42

    Match Maker

    Good points. I do agree next patch is a step in the right direction, I hope Wargaming keep on top of it Cheers & good luck
  5. Worker42

    Match Maker

    Well, I don't agree with your definition of below average; you may wish to refresh your memory, 35% is nearly bottom third, average is (by definition) something that encompasses 50%+. I think that the proposed fix for CV's should level that aspect out; here's hoping... Thanks for posting.
  6. Worker42

    Match Maker

    By definition 42.5% is below average, and actually far below average! A resonable spread of 'average' would be any measure which contains 48-52% of the measured population.
  7. Worker42

    Match Maker

    Well, without the equivalent of an xvm rating system, or similar, I cannot definitely comment on my status at this time; my impression is that I'm almost always in the top half (or higher) of the team for xp, amongst other things. Putting that aside; even if I am an average player I should still be doing far better than a 42.5% win rate. If we assume the spread of above average to below average to relate to win rates between 48 - 52% you can see the anomaly presented by 42.5%
  8. Worker42

    Match Maker

    Even 45-46% would be a vast improvement on my situation!
  9. Worker42

    Match Maker

    Yes, this is true; what you say is entirely correct. However, my point is that, after more than 500 matches, these things SHOULD balance out. Therefore, the fact that they haven't balanced out indicates to me that there is something more fundamentally wrong with the MM system. I think that, statistically 500+ matches should eliminate aberrations within the system, but it hasn't.
  10. Worker42

    Match Maker

    I've played 538 battles, so far, during the open beta test. During that time I've inflicted 14,345,940 damage (26,665 per match average) and sunk 415 enemy ships (while shooting down over 500 aircraft). I've been sunk 406 times, which gives a ratio of 1.02/1 in my favour. I own every premium ship available, apart from Warspite and the two pre-order destroyers, some of which have favourable match making. Despite this I only have a winning ratio of 42.5%. What do Wargaming think is wrong with the match maker, that it produces such an aberration? Surely even inactive bots should hover around 50% win rate after such a large sample of games? I welcome the plans to match aircraft carriers strictly to their equals, and the introduction of ranked battles also seems a good idea, but I think there is something fundamentally wrong with the match maker at a deeper level. Surely after more than 500 battles, and generally above average performances, my win ratio should at least be on the positive side of 50%; 500+ battles must be more than enough for any anomalies in the MM system to have off-set each other. So what's actually wrong? I think this is a great game, but I fear that it may ultimately be ruined unless Wargaming address this fundamental issue ASAP. Thanks and enjoy!
×