Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
gobolino

Collaborative study of MM on Eu server

47 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
2,043 posts
7,254 battles
36 minutes ago, Skyllon said:

Someone would have historical records of this issue - which is unlikely - but roflstomps seem to be happening more often these days...

 

Had many threads regarding this problem.  The last one actually had some good stats and someone did their homework showing that the teams were indeed, really unbalanced.  

 

This will continue to be the problem until WG does something about it and give both sides even teams.  The thing is, if they really want to (for various reasons).

 

Most people were like "you get roflstomps, and you sometimes do the roflstomps", which IMHO is just taking something on the chin like a sucker trying to laugh it off.  I would personally have both Teams better balanced even if it adds a few seconds onto the loading up screen.  

 

Having 6 players with 60+ WR, good Xp and good Damage one one team (probably 2 x divs), against a mixed bag of 40+, 45+ and 50+ isnt going to end well.

 

Chaps, have a look tonight after your games :cap_tea: Add the WR of both teams and you will be surprised (or not) to see the difference.  Then include average damage and Xp too? Sometimes it's a very one sided affair.

 

As for tier 8 MM, yeah it's the worst and always has been.  Just the way it is.  

 

I thank god daily it's not WOT level of S*** MM, which is comical. At least we stand a good chance in a tier 8 Ship in a tier 10 game.  No such luck in WOT as you cant even pen the tanks! 

 

A tier 3 DD (umi maybe) can still sink a tier 10 BB.  Imagine a tier 3 light tank against a tier 10 Heavy Tank in WOT.  Your royally buggered.

 

 

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
3,322 posts
13,277 battles
33 minutes ago, Redcap375 said:

Having 6 players with 60+ WR, good Xp and good Damage one one team (probably 2 x divs), against a mixed bag of 40+, 45+ and 50+ isnt going to end well.

I suggest that people only should be able to div up to an added average of 50% WR. You got one 60% WR player, then he only can div up with a 40% WR player at most. I e division WR capped at 50%. That should sort out mismatched teams fairly quickly :cap_tea:

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,043 posts
7,254 battles
11 minutes ago, loppantorkel said:

I suggest that people only should be able to div up to an added average of 50% WR. You got one 60% WR player, then he only can div up with a 40% WR player at most. I e division WR capped at 50%. That should sort out mismatched teams fairly quickly :cap_tea:

 

Would P*** too many people off with that one IMHO i'm afrade.  Most people that div up are on the same level if you know what I mean.

 

Have a team of 3 x 60+ WR, that fine.  Just balance it out with another 3 players with 60+ WR on the other side.  Not perfect but on the level at least.

 

But the bare minimum would be not having 2 x 3 60+ WR Divs on a single team!  Happened a few times lately.

 

2 x Very good divs with good players and good comms against a mix bag of solo captains is just asking for it. Simply have these 2 or 4 divs on opposite sides taking their combined stats into consideration. Don't put the 2 hardest divs on the same team.  That should be basic stuff to be honest.

 

Feels wrong even if you are on the winning team.  

 

I can live with all this by-the-way because you know, we just do don't we? But that doesn't make it right.  New players see this and will put the less sea worthy right off.  It's even worse for CV's captains.

 

 

 

 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
3,322 posts
13,277 battles
1 hour ago, Redcap375 said:

 

Would P*** too many people off with that one IMHO i'm afrade.  Most people that div up are on the same level if you know what I mean.

Yea, I know :) It's not a serious suggestion and WG should never do this. Otoh, I think balancing the teams skill wise is an equally bad idea to implement. It's just not a good route to enter. Ranked and CB are semi skill based. Randoms should be random. It's possible to interfere with unicum div and cvs, but generally, it shouldn't be too bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
3,999 posts
15,035 battles
On 5.8.2018 at 12:11 PM, Fat_Maniac said:

Also is that study specific to the EU cluster? 

 

You need to look at whats happening on all clusters and compare the results.

 

No they don't, because how the eff would we - as players on the EU server - be interested in the %s on the other servers? We don't play there, so those %s are of no value to us and neither are WGs explanations that "over all servers" the %s are okay-ish.

 

When You're house is burning you'd still want the fire department to come and stop the fire and not hear "Ah, it's okay.. the other three houses on your street are fine, so no need for us to do anything..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
152 posts
4,302 battles
11 hours ago, loppantorkel said:

I suggest that people only should be able to div up to an added average of 50% WR. You got one 60% WR player, then he only can div up with a 40% WR player at most. I e division WR capped at 50%. That should sort out mismatched teams fairly quickly :cap_tea:

I strongly disagree.

First of all it is unfair to all the good players out there.
As it is, we are already getting cancer from playing randoms and ranked is pure sh1t and far from competitive.CBs are also badly implemented.
What you are proposing faks good players more since it removes the only weapon they have against pleb stupidity, which is guaranteed teamwork.

What wg could do is:
Try to put players of equal skill ( judging by win rate,win rate on current ship, average damage and hit rate on current ship) against each other.
When that is not possible at once, wait.
Figure out what alternative ships can be put against each other.If they cant get 2 khabas for example of equal skill, then try a khaba vs harugumo and not Khaba vs gearing.
Try maching alternative ships with same skill players.
If that also fails, revert to current mm.

For this to work proper algorithms are required to judge skill based on the above stats.Please dont let the guy who designed "the ring" contest formula work on it.
Also, knowledge of what ships can fight each other "fairly/equally/similarly". Again, better ask the community and the unicums instead of your own guys.


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
3,322 posts
13,277 battles
3 minutes ago, Ouzo11 said:

I strongly disagree.

First of all it is unfair to all the good players out there.
As it is, we are already getting cancer from playing randoms and ranked is pure sh1t and far from competitive.CBs are also badly implemented.
What you are proposing faks good players more since it removes the only weapon they have against pleb stupidity, which is guaranteed teamwork.

What wg could do is:
Try to put players of equal skill ( judging by win rate,win rate on current ship, average damage and hit rate on current ship) against each other.
When that is not possible at once, wait.
Figure out what alternative ships can be put against each other.If they cant get 2 khabas for example of equal skill, then try a khaba vs harugumo and not Khaba vs gearing.
Try maching alternative ships with same skill players.
If that also fails, revert to current mm.

For this to work proper algorithms are required to judge skill based on the above stats.Please dont let the guy who designed "the ring" contest formula work on it.
Also, knowledge of what ships can fight each other "fairly/equally/similarly". Again, better ask the community and the unicums instead of your own guys.

While I agree that 'my suggestion' shouldn't be implemented, I also strongly disagree with your proposals. There are good reasons why WG isn't doing what you're suggesting.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HOO]
Players
1,271 posts
2,757 battles
21 hours ago, Deckeru_Maiku said:

 

No they don't, because how the eff would we - as players on the EU server - be interested in the %s on the other servers? We don't play there, so those %s are of no value to us and neither are WGs explanations that "over all servers" the %s are okay-ish.

 

When You're house is burning you'd still want the fire department to come and stop the fire and not hear "Ah, it's okay.. the other three houses on your street are fine, so no need for us to do anything..."

Because WG wont adjust the MM for a single cluster, they will only change it if ihere is an issue across all regions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
3,999 posts
15,035 battles
53 minutes ago, Fat_Maniac said:

Because WG wont adjust the MM for a single cluster, they will only change it if ihere is an issue across all regions.

 

I guess they would change their ways quite fastif enough players would leave the game stating the MM as their reason. Especially as it's EU where they - probably - make the most money

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HOO]
Players
1,271 posts
2,757 battles
31 minutes ago, Deckeru_Maiku said:

 

I guess they would change their ways quite fastif enough players would leave the game stating the MM as their reason. Especially as it's EU where they - probably - make the most money

They claimed a while ago the BB overpopulation everyone was shouting about was an EU problem only, so they wouldn't do anything about it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[3STG]
Players
328 posts
10,889 battles
On ‎7‎.‎8‎.‎2018 at 9:06 PM, Deckeru_Maiku said:

 

I guess they would change their ways quite fastif enough players would leave the game stating the MM as their reason. Especially as it's EU where they - probably - make the most money

I believe this already has happened. There was topic(s) about it and some data, too.

 

EDIT : And my personal friend quit also because of this, +4 months ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CHATS]
Community Contributor
6,311 posts
10,708 battles

An Update of the Data collected 

 

T9 Games

 

Spoiler
Stats   Participant Games Victory Top Tier
Top Tier 27,80%   Gobolino 39 48,65% 25,64%
Mid Tier 71,96%   fish_and_ship 4 75,00% 0,00%
Victory 63,21%   Mordian5 2 50,00% 50,00%
Defeat 36,79%   Webley_Mark 21 61,90% 33,33%
      Mirdwen 120 67,23% 28,33%
Top Tier WR 58,12%   Spartatian 2 100,00% 0,00%
Mid Tier WR 65,03%   Drukmil 7 71,43% 42,86%
      Juesty_Tylor 28 42,86% 21,43%
      Captain_Tox 78 63,64% 30,77%
Top Tier 00-06 25,00%   Canopy94 21 52,38% 28,57%
Top Tier 06-12 31,31%   BoumBoum 0    
Top Tier 12-18 25,43%   Freaky_Hope 59 72,88% 28,81%
Top Tier 18-00 28,38%   159Hunter 46 65,22% 23,91%
      Finitan 0    
Top Tier DD 27,95%   Notice 1 100,00% 0,00%
Top Tier CA 31,91%   TOTAL 428 63,21%  
Top Tier BB 21,62%          
Top Tier CV 30,00%   Games 00-06 8    
      Games 06-12 99    
Top Tier Solo 28,65%   Games 12-18 173    
Top Tier Duo 18,18%   Games 18-00 148    
Top Tier Trio 25,71%          
      Games DD 229    
Solo 370   Games CA 94    
Duo 22   Games BB 74    
Trio 35   Games CV 30    
             
             
      Ships Games %  
      Iowa 11 2,57%  
      Friedrich der Große 1 0,23%  
      Fletcher 30 7,01%  
      Izumo 7 1,64%  
      Roon 4 0,93%  
      Missouri 48 11,21%  
      Yugumo 8 1,87%  
      Ibuki 1 0,23%  
      Neptune 15 3,50%  
      Dmitri Donskoi 3 0,70%  
      Z-46 28 6,54%  
      Udaloi 0 0,00%  
      Essex 0 0,00%  
      Alsace 8 1,87%  
      Taiho 30 7,01%  
      Lion 0 0,00%  
      Saint-Louis 0 0,00%  
      Tashkent 0 0,00%  
      Musashi 0 0,00%  
      Chung Mu 71 16,59%  
      Buffalo 6 1,40%  
      Kronshtadt 0 0,00%  
      Seattle 65 15,19%  
      Black 28 6,54%  
      Jutland 0 0,00%  
      Kitakaze 64 14,95%  
      Jean Bart 0 0,00%  
        0 0,00%  
      TOTAL 428 100,00%  

 

Regarding our beloved T8 Battles 1500 games have been recorded :

Spoiler
Stats   Participant games WR
Top Tier 33,00%   Gobolino 323 52,32%
Mid Tier 16,20%   fish_and_ship 6 33,33%
Low Tier 50,80%   Mordian5 67 64,18%
Victory 61,40%   Webley_Mark 144 58,33%
Defeat 38,60%   Mirdwen 182 59,34%
      Spartatian 24 83,33%
Top Tier WR 65,05%   Drukmil 20 40,00%
 Mid Tier WR 60,49%   Juesty_Tylor 499 71,94%
 Low Tier WR 59,32%   Captain_Tox 24 50,00%
      Canopy94 67 53,73%
Top Tier 00-06 40,68%   BoumBoum 36 55,56%
Top Tier 06-12 34,71%   Freaky_Hope 63 58,73%
Top Tier 12-18 33,95%   159Hunter 13 30,77%
Top Tier 18-00 29,11%   Finitan 0  
      Notice 32 59,38%
Top Tier DD 29,82%   TOTAL 1500 60,40%
Top Tier CA 35,78%        
Top Tier BB 35,28%   Batailles 00-06 59  
Top Tier CV 30,56%   Batailles 06-12 314  
      Batailles 12-18 701  
Top Tier Solo 33,31%   Batailles 18-20 426  
Top Tier Duo 28,36%        
Top Tier Trio 31,96%   Batailles DD 342  
      Batailles CA 408  
Solo 1 336   Batailles BB 377  
Duo 67   Batailles CV 373  
Trio 97        
           
      Ship Games %
      Admiral Hipper 28 1,87%
      Akizuki 52 3,47%
      Alabama 36 2,40%
      Amagi 29 1,93%
      ARP Takao 4 0,27%
      Asashio 20 1,33%
      Atago 0 0,00%
      Baltimore 26 1,73%
      Benson 34 2,27%
      Bismarck 28 1,87%
      Chapayev 14 0,93%
      Charles Martel 72 4,80%
      Cleveland 141 9,40%
      Edinburgh 2 0,13%
      Enterprise 3 0,20%
      Gascogne 21 1,40%
      Graf Zeppelin 342 22,80%
      HSF Harekaze 37 2,47%
      Hsienyang 0 0,00%
      Kagero 45 3,00%
      Kidd 24 1,60%
      Kiev 23 1,53%
      Kii 1 0,07%
      Lexington 0 0,00%
      Loyang 26 1,73%
      Massachusetts 32 2,13%
      Mikhail Kutuzov 15 1,00%
      Mogami 85 5,67%
      Monarch 42 2,80%
      North Carolina 24 1,60%
      Ognevoi 20 1,33%
      Prinz Eugen 22 1,47%
      Richelieu 43 2,87%
      Roma 20 1,33%
      Shōkaku 28 1,87%
      Tirpitz 101 6,73%
      Lightning 21 1,40%
      Z-23 39 2,60%
      TOTAL 1500 100,00%

 

So we reach the 33 % for Top tier position with a 17% / 50% distribution for Mid/Low and this is what it's the most annoying in this tier according to the ship and to the line up, you are often only two or three TVIII against a majority of X and some IX. 

We have a good representation of all the classes and one ship was overplayed;  Graf Zeppelin!  thank's toJuesty_Tylor :cap_like:

A second impression and that MM would take into account of the class of ship: the DD's and CV's are less often Top tier than BB's and CA's. For CV it belongs certainly of to her under representation of the class but not for the DD's ?

 

T7 Games

Spoiler
Stats   Participant Batailles Victoire Top Tier Premium
Date
Top Tier 48,64%   Gobolino 124 47,97% 46,34% 02/07-01/08
Mid Tier 30,45%   fish_and_ship 155 63,23% 46,45%  
Low Tier 20,92%   Mordian5 63 57,14% 44,44% Non
Victoire 58,66%   Webley_Mark 128 59,38% 53,91% Non
Défaite 41,34%   Mirdwen 102 63,73% 43,14% Non
      Spartatian 0      
Victoire Top Tier 58,27%   Drukmil 23 56,52% 60,87%  
Victoire Mid Tier 63,41%   Juesty_Tylor 145 53,10% 51,03% Oui
Victoire Low Tier 52,66%   Captain_Tox 4 75,00% 100,00%  
      Canopy94 10 60,00% 50,00% Non
Top Tier Minuit 46,43%   BoumBoum 0      
Top Tier Matin 47,56%   Freaky_Hope 0     Non
Top Tier Midi 49,74%   159Hunter 14 64,29% 57,14%  
Top Tier Soir 47,98%   Finitan 2 50,00% 50,00%  
      Notice 39 79,49% 43,59%  
Top Tier DD 43,35%   TOTAL 809 58,66% 48,64%  
Top Tier CA 55,34%            
Top Tier BB 42,78%   Batailles Minuit 28      
Top Tier CV 38,10%   Batailles Matin 164      
      Batailles Midi 393      
      Batailles Soir 223      
        808      
      Batailles DD 233      
      Batailles CA 366      
      Batailles BB 187      
      Batailles CV 21      

 

T7 is the reverse image of Tier 8 , Most of the games are top tier or Mid tier and only few as low tier. is it the good tier to improve players"s skill and to learn the game ?

 

 

T6 Games

 

Spoiler
Stats   Participant Batailles Victoire Top Tier
Top Tier 27,84%   Gobolino 123 54,10% 23,58%
Mid Tier 36,60%   fish_and_ship 29 55,17% 31,03%
Low Tier 35,57%   Mordian5 35 60,00% 37,14%
Victoire 60,47%   Webley_Mark 23 47,83% 30,43%
Défaite 39,53%   Mirdwen 83 65,06% 31,33%
      Spartatian 0    
Victoire Top Tier 72,22%   Drukmil 3 66,67% 66,67%
Victoire Mid Tier 56,34%   Juesty_Tylor 21 57,14% 23,81%
Victoire Low Tier 55,47%   Captain_Tox 1 100,00% 0,00%
      Canopy94 51 70,59% 23,53%
Top Tier Minuit 25,00%   BoumBoum 0    
Top Tier Matin 34,65%   Freaky_Hope 4 75,00% 0,00%
Top Tier Midi 22,81%   159Hunter 0    
Top Tier Soir 29,46%   Finitan 5 80,00% 60,00%
      Notice 10 80,00% 20,00%
Top Tier DD 28,13%   TOTAL 388 60,47% 35,57%
Top Tier CA 26,15%          
Top Tier BB 31,91%          
Top Tier CV 30,00%   Batailles Minuit 4    
      Batailles Matin 101    
      Batailles Midi 171    
      Batailles Soir 112    
             
      Batailles DD 192    
      Batailles CA 130    
      Batailles BB 47    
      Batailles CV 10    
             
      Navire Batailles %  
      Graf Spee 9 2,33%  
      Makarov 0 0,00%  
      Aigle 14 3,63%  
      Anshan 3 0,78%  
      Aoba 0 0,00%  
      Arizona 1 0,26%  
      Bayern 1 0,26%  
      Budyonny 1 0,26%  
      Dallas 28 7,25%  
      De Grasse 25 6,48%  
      Duca d'Aosta 10 2,59%  
      Dunkerque 10 2,59%  
      Ernst Gaede 11 2,85%  
      Farragut 7 1,81%  
      Fubuki 2 0,52%  
      Fushun 25 6,48%  
      Fuso 5 1,30%  
      Gallant 106 27,46%  
      Gnevny 1 0,26%  
      Hatsuharu 1 0,26%  
      HSF Graf Spee 1 0,26%  
      Huanghe 0 0,00%  
      Icarus 17 4,40%  
      Independence 5 1,30%  
      La Galissonnière 0 0,00%  
      Leander 29 7,51%  
      Molotov 18 4,66%  
      Monaghan 0 0,00%  
      Mutsu 7 1,81%  
      New Mexico 10 2,59%  
      Normandie 5 1,30%  
      Nürnberg 2 0,52%  
      Ognevoi (< 06.03.2017) 0 0,00%  
      Pensacola 5 1,30%  
      Perth 6 1,55%  
      Prinz Eitel Friedrich 0 0,00%  
      Queen Elizabeth 3 0,78%  
      Ryujo 5 1,30%  
      Shinonome 8 2,07%  
      T-61 0 0,00%  
      Warspite 5 1,30%  
        386 100,00%  

 

T6 is less horrible that I was thinking, with a fair amount of games in each of the positions.  But because of the small amout of data (less than 400 games recorded) Figures can change, but I feel that it give a fair image of what we can expect.

 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TEACH]
Alpha Tester
2,437 posts
9,459 battles
On 8/5/2018 at 11:17 AM, gobolino said:

 

:Smile_Default:

 

Some players believe that WG "adjust" the MM just for them in order to put them in a difficult situation because :

- They dont put money in the game

- They've put money in the game

- They have a bad WR

- WG dont like them

- Earth is flat

Interesting results, so nicely done, but obviously sources need to be verified, etc etc but even if we take the results as accurate, why did we need to prove to people that the mm wasn't actually out to get them with beliefs such as the ones you state above? They're clearly delusional and even if you provide the information many will be inclined toward cognitive dissonance and denial. I suppose, even if you bring one hapless soul around it would be worth it, haha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CHATS]
Community Contributor
6,311 posts
10,708 battles

 

Il y a 8 minutes, Shaka_D a dit :

Interesting results, so nicely done, but obviously sources need to be verified, etc etc but even if we take the results as accurate, why did we need to prove to people that the mm wasn't actually out to get them with beliefs such as the ones you state above? They're clearly delusional and even if you provide the information many will be inclined toward cognitive dissonance and denial. I suppose, even if you bring one hapless soul around it would be worth it, haha.

 

You cant prove a "believer" he is wrong. There is nothing like the "truth" for such players.

 

This survey was made for players who are asking questions, who feels that MM not fair for them.

 

The Sources ? only players records (you can check pseudo) nothing coming from a third party.

Acccuracy of the results ? Only WG can tell us if our figures match with the one they have, I've asked them to confirm but they didnt answer.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
1,905 posts
5,850 battles
27 minutes ago, Shaka_D said:

They're clearly delusional and even if you provide the information many will be inclined toward cognitive dissonance and denial.

 

Personally, I'm just waiting for the "residence's dumbbells" to claim that they only had bad (tier 8-9) matchmaking because they are good players while casually ignoring the implications of such a statement. Either that, or they won't read it properly and post a tinfoil "explanation/objection".

 

Regarding tier 6 matchmaking, the low sample size obviously has an effect but the common perception may also be caused by the increase in power from tier 6 to 7 (overmatch, speed, number of guns, torpedo range, etc.) which makes it more annoying to be uptiered. It will be interesting to see the results with more games played.

 

Great work nonetheless :cat_cool:.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,616 posts
10,141 battles

WG actually has multiple similar patents on their matchmaker, and they all contain this as a possbile aspect:

 

Quote

According to another aspect, the matchmaking server may store a win/loss percentage for each user (or vehicle) at a given battle level. As the player's win/loss ratio decreases, the player becomes more likely to be placed in battles having battle levels at the lower end of the allowable range, whereas as the player's win/loss ration increases, the player becomes more likely to be placed in battles having battle levels at the upper end of the allowable range. Thus, when a player has been repeatedly put into too many difficult battles, the balancing is done in favor of easier battle sessions, thereby encouraging the player by providing an easier game environment. Similarly, when the player has been repeatedly put into too many easy battles, the balancing is done in favor of harder battle sessions, thereby keeping the player challenged instead of letting the player become bored with easy games. A first possible algorithm is to divide the permissible battle levels evenly across a range from zero (0) to two (2), and place the vehicle into the battle level corresponding to the win/loss ratio, where any ratio greater than two (2) automatically results in the vehicle being placed in the highest possible battle level. Another possible algorithm is to increase the battle level by one (within the permissible range) for a vehicle each time a player wins a battle with that vehicle, and decrease the battle level by one (within the permissible range) each time a player loses a battle with that vehicle. If the battle level is already at the upper end of the range and the player wins the battle, the battle level may remain constant. Similarly, if the battle level is already at the lower end of the range and the player loses the battle, the battle level may remain constant.

 

https://patents.google.com/patent/US9610504B2/en?oq=US9610504

(US Patent 9610504 - Wargaming.net Ltd)

 

 

What does this mean ?

  • We don't know if this is included in the Warships matchmaker. It is simply a possible aspect mentioned in this patent (which had World of Tanks in mind).
     
  • Even if it is included, it simply means that a well performing player will be bottom tier more often. His performance will still influence the outcome of the battle. In fact, a well played bottom tier ship can still carry, while a bad-performing top tier ship is even disadvantageous for the stats of that bad-performing player (because top tier ships are even more important to the outcome of the battle). So this would not be "forcing 50% WR" like some silly people claim. It would simply be a change in comfort.
     
  • What it does mean though, is that WG is no stranger to the thought of manipulating the MM in order to achieve certain goals. And we simply don't know of course, if and to what extend they are actually doing it in World of Warships.

 

TX divisioning does offer some protection against MM at least...

There are enough well performing players, I also know some who don't spend any money.

 

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ONE2]
Players
2,728 posts
15,713 battles
On 8/5/2018 at 10:34 AM, gobolino said:

One suprise was that CA have a better chance to be top tier and DD less (not enough data on CV to be accurate).

Innderesding data! Keep it coming. :cap_like:

 

However, this particular finding is not necessarily so surprising, when you think that relatively often in tier 10 matches, you would have 5 BB, 5 DD and only 2 Cruisers. Therefore it would probably be necessary to include more bottom-tier DD's into the match to make up the numbers. However, now that they have made the "Softcap" of 4 DD's per team this will perhaps begin changing a bit. Of course, that still leaves the 5 BB's per team issue to be dealt with.:cap_hmm:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CHATS]
Community Contributor
6,311 posts
10,708 battles

"I'll be back" 

 

I will come back end of december with updated datas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CHATS]
Community Contributor
6,311 posts
10,708 battles

Due to the change in MM Mecanism (update 7.11) I've stopped the Survey on the 21/11/2018

 

I've updated the first post with the final datas on Tier 8.

 

 

We've started a new survey since the 22/11/2018.

 

I will keep you informed.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×