Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
10ThousandThings

Faildivs or MM anchoring?

31 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
547 posts
2,019 battles

Recently I've noticed a number of fail divisions – though probably no more or fewer than usual – both in my own games and on streams. What's caught my attention, however, is that none of them have been 'punished' by having ships in the 'wrong' MM spread: T4-5 divs have always been in T5 battles, never T6 or 7, etc. I haven't found anything suggesting a change either here or in patch notes, so presume it's just a coincidence... But have I (quite possibly) missed something? Have others noticed the same thing?

 

If faildivs are now in fact 'anchored' (and I do emphasise that I'm asking whether I've missed something, rather than claiming that they definitely are), I can't quite decide how I feel about it. On the one hand, on a personal level, the idea of playing guaranteed top-tier Giulio + V-170 divs with a mate who just started the game is tempting. On the other hand, the mere thought makes me feel so dirty I have an urge to bathe in pure undiluted Dettol. In terms of whether it's good for the game as a whole, I can see reasonable arguments both ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
547 posts
2,019 battles
9 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

Nothing changed.

 

2 minutes ago, Commander_Cornflakes said:

It's still as random as it ever was. You can be lucky with your fail division or you can get a +3 Match.

Okay, confirmed what I suspected then: just coincidence :Smile_honoring:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
6,857 posts
7,643 battles

How can you know if there arent occasions where this doesnt apply? :Smile-_tongue:

They dont have to get punished - if they use a CV, its actually very likely that they wont get punished at all, since MM needs a similiar anchor division to screw both of em.

But other divisions can get punished, or not. Depends on MM. Ive seen both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
Players
4,945 posts
7,657 battles

Nothing has changed in the *close* past. But just before that we got the MM change to Mirror MM which is the thing guilty for this, and more people are starting to figure it out. Ironically enough more people doing this is the best "counter" to it as they'll just meet same style divs thus going into proper faildiv MM

 

This works exactly like it previously did with CVs anchoring divs:

  • MM is forced to find an enemy of the same type + tier
    • Div of t4 + t5 ship (or any other combo) thus needs to find a t4 + t5 ship to fight against. Since normally that t4 + t5 won't be in a div it's a guaranteed t5 match (ofc, still can be +1 if you go higher, like 5 + 6 can meet 7s)
    • There are 2 ways for MM to stop this:
      • As already mentioned div of X + Y vs div of X + Y, and this happens more as more people start doing it
        • Problem is that they kinda need to match not only the tier, but also the ship type as in t4 BB vs t4 BB. t4 BB vs t4 DD wouldn't work as the MM would have to find another t4 BB and anther t4 DD for that match
      • The X + Y div needs get in a match where someone has sat in queue for at least 3 min as then the Mirror MM is thrown away

 

But yeah, if you are grinding your 8s - ask for someone to play some t7 in a div with you. You should get t8 most of the time with some rare t9 battles (like 6:4 ratio? this is just an educated guess) and really highly unlikely to catch any t10 games

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,545 posts
6,756 battles

You never suceeded in getting ina T7 match with a Kamikaze, you'r missing out boi :Smile_trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
8,460 posts
11,961 battles

The only way of tricking MM halfway consistently I can think of is CV anchoring at tier VII due to the semi-mirror MM for CVs and the fact no double CV games exist above tier VII, but even that is only really in benefit of the other two non-CV ships that are division with you as they can play tier VIII ships and more or less always be at worst middle tier (and if the CV is a Saipan it won't hit it too hard either cuz tier IX planes) as regular MM will never match that division with another solo tier VII in a tier X match for obvious reasons. Only exception is when MM finds another division that wants to try the same trick at roughly the same time that it can match both against each other at tier X (maximum MM tiering for the involved tier VIII ships).

 

 

Just another reason why division should always be an uniform ship tier, remove the possibility of unwitting faildivisions completely and remove the niche exploit of CV anchoring.

 

 

24 minutes ago, wilkatis_LV said:

But yeah, if you are grinding your 8s - ask for someone to play some t7 in a div with you. You should get t8 most of the time with some rare t9 battles (like 6:4 ratio? this is just an educated guess) and really highly unlikely to catch any t10 games

Without said tier VII being a CV, divisioning with any other tier VII ship in a tier VIII one yourself still treats your division as a maximum tier X MM bracket and you should be matched into tier X games as often as you would in a pure tier VIII division.

It's only the necessity for MM to mirror CV tiers that enables CV division anchoring.

 

Unless WG changed the MM algorithm to literally reward faildivisioning by reducing the chance of getting bottom tiered ...

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
Players
4,945 posts
7,657 battles
6 minutes ago, Aotearas said:

Without said tier VII being a CV, divisioning with any other tier VII ship in a tier VIII one yourself still treats your division as a maximum tier X MM bracket and you should be matched into tier X games as often as you would in a pure tier VIII division. 

It's only the necessity for MM to mirror CV tiers that enables CV division anchoring.

 

Unless WG changed the MM algorithm to literally reward faildivisioning by reducing the chance of getting bottom tiered ...

They changed it when they introduced the Mirror MM in early 7.something patches. Yes, I tested it :Smile_trollface:

 

Basically the requirement for the 1st 3min of queue is to "match the ship tier and type" which will lead to all ships being able to anchor the div. The only difference here is that CVs keep this ability regardless of queue time, all others have it only for those 3min as after it Mirror MM is discarded

 

TL;DR is  - pick a tier 7 BB with a t8 ship, and as long as enemies don't have a div with a t7 BB in it (and someone didn't sit in queue past 3min) you're guaranteed that you won't see 10s

Ofc, feel free to replace that BB with a DD or CA, but I think they get punished more by being uptiered even in just +1 MM games

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
8,460 posts
11,961 battles
3 minutes ago, wilkatis_LV said:

They changed it when they introduced the Mirror MM in early 7.something patches. Yes, I tested it :Smile_trollface:

 

Basically the requirement for the 1st 3min of queue is to "match the ship tier and type" which will lead to all ships being able to anchor the div. The only difference here is that CVs keep this ability regardless of queue time, all others have it only for those 3min as after it Mirror MM is discarded

 

TL;DR is  - pick a tier 7 BB with a t8 ship, and as long as enemies don't have a div with a t7 BB in it (and someone didn't sit in queue past 3min) you're guaranteed that you won't see 10s

Ofc, feel free to replace that BB with a DD or CA, but I think they get punished more by being uptiered even in just +1 MM games

 

That ... would be retarded. So straight in WG's ballpark.

 

Which just makes WG's refusal to limit divisions to the same tier even more unbelievable when they actively tweaked their MM to be even more exploitable. Guess in Soviet Russia, exploit programs you.

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
6,857 posts
7,643 battles
25 minutes ago, wilkatis_LV said:

They changed it when they introduced the Mirror MM in early 7.something patches. Yes, I tested it :Smile_trollface:

 

:cap_fainting:

I mean i have seen quite some fail divisions not getting punished as of late, but i thought ive seen the opposite aswell (which should be rather unlikely with 3 min rule)

Guess we have to try that one aswell :Smile_trollface: Im not a fan of that really - first time we tried that with a CV, got paired against a T7 CV in my T4 CV :cap_haloween:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
Players
4,945 posts
7,657 battles
1 minute ago, DFens_666 said:

 

:cap_fainting:

I mean i have seen quite some fail divisions not getting punished as of late, but i thought ive seen the opposite aswell (which should be rather unlikely with 3 min rule)

Guess we have to try that one aswell :Smile_trollface: Im not a fan of that really - first time we tried that with a CV, got paired against a T7 CV in my T4 CV :cap_haloween:

Been there, done that :Smile_veryhappy:

 

But yeah, if you pay more attention to it each time your team has a proper faildiv (like a t7 ship in t10 game) so do the enemies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,773 posts
8,503 battles

We did a 2x T7 + 1x T6 divi lately (well, he just wanted to play his T-61) and we got a T6/T7 game with no other divi matched to us. I was actually surprised. Im usualy not into this anchoring thing, so I have only this one example. But @wilkatis_LV is definitely a more relaible sorce then @ColonelPete is - @10ThousandThings.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
6,857 posts
7,643 battles
1 minute ago, Bear_Necessities said:

Watch out, he'll have a spreadsheet ready of all the times he's been correct :Smile_hiding:

 

Probably still wrong? :cap_fainting:

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
Players
4,945 posts
7,657 battles
26 minutes ago, Bear_Necessities said:

Watch out, he'll have a spreadsheet ready of all the times he's been correct :Smile_hiding:

Jokes aside those spreadsheets are actually quite nice for showing stuff like statistics :Smile_veryhappy: Don't think there's any more convenient way than they are

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
547 posts
2,019 battles
2 hours ago, wilkatis_LV said:

They changed it when they introduced the Mirror MM in early 7.something patches. Yes, I tested it :Smile_trollface:

 

Basically the requirement for the 1st 3min of queue is to "match the ship tier and type" which will lead to all ships being able to anchor the div. The only difference here is that CVs keep this ability regardless of queue time, all others have it only for those 3min as after it Mirror MM is discarded

 

TL;DR is  - pick a tier 7 BB with a t8 ship, and as long as enemies don't have a div with a t7 BB in it (and someone didn't sit in queue past 3min) you're guaranteed that you won't see 10s

Ofc, feel free to replace that BB with a DD or CA, but I think they get punished more by being uptiered even in just +1 MM games

3 hours ago, wilkatis_LV said:

Nothing has changed in the *close* past. But just before that we got the MM change to Mirror MM which is the thing guilty for this, and more people are starting to figure it out. Ironically enough more people doing this is the best "counter" to it as they'll just meet same style divs thus going into proper faildiv MM

 

This works exactly like it previously did with CVs anchoring divs:

  • MM is forced to find an enemy of the same type + tier
    • Div of t4 + t5 ship (or any other combo) thus needs to find a t4 + t5 ship to fight against. Since normally that t4 + t5 won't be in a div it's a guaranteed t5 match (ofc, still can be +1 if you go higher, like 5 + 6 can meet 7s)
    • There are 2 ways for MM to stop this:
      • As already mentioned div of X + Y vs div of X + Y, and this happens more as more people start doing it
        • Problem is that they kinda need to match not only the tier, but also the ship type as in t4 BB vs t4 BB. t4 BB vs t4 DD wouldn't work as the MM would have to find another t4 BB and anther t4 DD for that match
      • The X + Y div needs get in a match where someone has sat in queue for at least 3 min as then the Mirror MM is thrown away

 

But yeah, if you are grinding your 8s - ask for someone to play some t7 in a div with you. You should get t8 most of the time with some rare t9 battles (like 6:4 ratio? this is just an educated guess) and really highly unlikely to catch any t10 games

I did wonder about this explanation. In the first patch or two after mirrored MM, I did notice some occasions of solo players getting uptiered (Langley in a T7 game, for example – I felt particularly sorry for that guy) to mirror faildivs which had got deservedly uptiered. Obviously this is idiotic, so I wondered whether something like you're describing might have been used to address that.

 

I mean, I'm not likely to try it – least of all given thatt I don't want to inadvertently land my mate in +3 MM and have plenty of T4 ships whose commanders need training (also, bathing in Dettol sounds expensive and unpleasant) – but interesting that you've noticed something similar.

 

All in all, however, this...

3 hours ago, Aotearas said:

Just another reason why division should always be an uniform ship tier, remove the possibility of unwitting faildivisions completely and remove the niche exploit of CV anchoring

... would be by far the most sensible approach. I mean, sure you might want to play ships at different tiers, but I think asking people to deal with having to pick ships of the same tier is less problematic than having exploits like MM anchoring available, or asking people to put up with the, erm, inconvenient possibility of a non-mirrored faildiv on their team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ALONE]
Players
1,417 posts
10,924 battles
2 hours ago, 10ThousandThings said:

I did wonder about this explanation. In the first patch or two after mirrored MM, I did notice some occasions of solo players getting uptiered (Langley in a T7 game, for example – I felt particularly sorry for that guy) to mirror faildivs which had got deservedly uptiered. Obviously this is idiotic, so I wondered whether something like you're describing might have been used to address that.

Hmm. Any pics or the replay file header? I don't think it is possibru to be -3 without divisioning :cap_yes:

From what I see MM first tries to find similarly tiered division (doesn't keep strictly the same class, though), and if it can't be found, treats lower tier members as the higher tier (so you can be -3 if you are fail-divisioning).  Generally looks fair, but not all fail-divisions are equally failing - some are intentional, and matching such intentional with real-potato-fail is simply wrong.

All fail-divisions should be plainly treated by MM as consisting of only their highest tier. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[4_0_4]
Players
6,109 posts
12,458 battles
On 1/13/2019 at 10:10 PM, 10ThousandThings said:

T4-5 divs have always been in T5 battles, never T6 or 7, etc.

 

Happened on the 5th Jan:

shot-19_01.14_22_13.09-0585.thumb.jpg.a784c319ac741875d56468ed04613c78.jpg

 

Looks like you'll need two of those divs for it to happen tho.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,773 posts
8,503 battles
5 minutes ago, Zemeritt said:

Looks like you'll need two of those divs for it to happen tho.

 

Yep, that was always like that. People try to anchor with CVs and get effed, when they meet a division, that is trying the same. We tried it once and got punished right away. Got us a game with T4 + T7 CV. Serves us right, i know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
20,526 posts
12,586 battles
25 minutes ago, Zemeritt said:

Looks like you'll need two of those divs for it to happen tho.

Not for regular divisions. Only CV divisions can anchor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BBMM]
Players
4,313 posts
4,842 battles
23 hours ago, Aotearas said:

Guess in Soviet Russia, exploit programs you.

Nono very wrong comd rade. GULAG programs you to be exploit, da. 

 

21 hours ago, wilkatis_LV said:

Don't think there's any more convenient way than they are

Gulag always better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
Players
4,945 posts
7,657 battles
41 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

Not for regular divisions. Only CV divisions can anchor.

Go ahead and try it out yourself. Mirror MM forces BBs / Cruisers / DDs to fight BBs / Cruisers / DDs of their own tier. Unless that same tier & type ship is in another faildiv (failing in the same tier direction aswell) in the enemy team, in that case you can go to the +3 MM for them.

 

But I won't repeat myself here, I already explained it above

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
94 posts
5,804 battles
On 1/13/2019 at 10:25 PM, Commander_Cornflakes said:

It's still as random as it ever was. You can be lucky with your fail division or you can get a +3 Match.

Are you sure about it? I haven't seen a t7 in a t10 game in a very long time. Or other "mismatched" ships. 

 

It definitively feels different now. I cannot pinpoint it, but I think it changed when they introduced the mirrored teams. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JRM]
Players
3,409 posts
18,948 battles

You want to ruin somones day and have your karma resuced on the process? AS Saipan + 2 t8 bbs for sniping the spotted :Smile_trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×