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

Skill-related matchmaking for more balanced games

115 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
2,109 posts
18,486 battles

From what many people keep writing on the forum, as well as the personal impression from playing the game, we are increasingly getting very lopsided matchmaking as regards player skills, resulting in an increasing number of "roflstomps" where the team with all the bad players gets wiped off the map very quickly. This sucks for players on both sides, though possibly not quite as hard for those on the winning side as they at least get a win out of it. But if they're not the ones carrying that win, they don't get to do much.

 

This is a dangerous development for WG as well as the players because it sucks the fun out of the game. And if you include the causatory function of WG's predatory marketing techniques, which result in purposely moving players up to higher tiers much faster than their skills develop, it has all the hallmarks of a vicious cycle. Also because, even on the winning side, lesser players by and large don't get to learn much. If your misplays aren't punished, you might often not even recognize them as misplays, or don't reflect on them much.

 

I keep wondering if there really isn't anything that we as players could do to try and steer WG toward a more sustainable, less predatory business model as a whole. Especially in view of the recent postponement of 0.8.0. Or do we really have to rely solely on the CCs raising a big enough stink.

 

This might be a digression fuelled by the respective passage of the most recent Mingles w Jingles video as well as the new Flambass version of the genre, provisionally title "Fun With Hans".

 

In any event, what I'm proposing is not grouping 'bad' players into whole matches of their own, but at least making some form of effort to distribute carry-capable players and "potatoes" evenly on both sides.

 

  • Cool 6
  • Boring 8
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
5,814 posts
10,262 battles
5 minutes ago, Nautical_Metaphor said:

because it sucks the fun out of the game

That is under the assumption, that everybody has the same definition of "Fun" than you do ... which is ... debatable.

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GRKEN]
[GRKEN]
Players
1,090 posts
6,178 battles

I would like to see a bracket system similar to CBs or even ranked but with more steps. This bracket would be based on your ships winrate. Could even have a small icon next to the ship in port displaying which bracket that ship is in. I think this would help to sort out a LOT of frustration regarding losing streaks caused by bad teams.

Take for example my GK. I have an absolutely depressingly low winrate, Im talking 30ish %. So even if I enjoy playing the ship I rarely take it out. But if I was put in matchups with worse player I could more easely carry the games and thus win more. Up until I get up to a higher bracket and then I would have more competition. And if I couldnt hold on to that I would get thrown back down instead.

You could even advance this further and give wins in higher brackets higher rewards etc.

 

This ofcourse wont happen. WG is obsessed with short queue times so they want to fill the teams as fast as possible. I however would rather wait a few minutes and get a good, even and decent match than the abomination we have now thats only getting worse and worse.

We discussed this in an earlier thread but the further this goes on the less meaning your Winrate will have. Because the more onesided the games are the less impact you as a player can have in the outcome of the game.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
9,327 posts
10,972 battles

Daily "Skill MM" topic since inception of World of Tanks almost decade ago... Guess what chances are of that happening:Smile_popcorn:

  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BLITZ]
Modder
4,576 posts
8,425 battles

@Nautical_Metaphor

 

Please show an example of a MMO game with teams of multiple players duelling each other where the system  of a MM-system uses a skilled-based asignment in far superior in comparison to a random asignment of players.

 

I bet you cannot.

 

 

 

The "skilled-MM" is a kind of holy grail for some kind of conspiracy theory fans, that fail to understand basic understanding of chance and random.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ODB]
Alpha Tester
2,913 posts
11,362 battles
45 minutes ago, Nautical_Metaphor said:

In any event, what I'm proposing is not grouping 'bad' players into whole matches of their own, but at least making some form of effort to distribute carry-capable players and "potatoes" evenly on both sides.

Evenly distributing the teams in this way would in my opinion be a great idea, with more or less equal number of newbies, noobs, good players on each team. But sadly this has been discussed for years and years in more WG games than just this one, and WG still hasn't taken the bait, are not interested, won't ever do it. A lot also has to do with the divisiveness of the forums with so many for and against ideas like this, and the fact that even those of us chatting, debating and fighting on the forums are just a minority. In other words, it's a pipe dream, and my very sincere advice to you is to simply forget it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BOYS]
Players
130 posts
8,943 battles

I’d rather see the CCs putting their effort into educating the playerbase of how to play well and not get stomped, which they are doing. Discussing the matter is welcome, but this conversation is barely a new one and I’d leave the pitchforks out, even if I get that some people get upset by the matchmaking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GRKEN]
[GRKEN]
Players
1,090 posts
6,178 battles
16 minutes ago, principat121 said:

@Nautical_Metaphor

 

Please show an example of a MMO game with teams of multiple players duelling each other where the system  of a MM-system uses a skilled-based asignment in far superior in comparison to a random asignment of players.

 

I bet you cannot.

 

 

 

The "skilled-MM" is a kind of holy grail for some kind of conspiracy theory fans, that fail to understand basic understanding of chance and random.

 

Starcraft 2 and Warcraft 3. Both solo and in teamgames. Also WoW Arena. But those are the only PvP games Ive played other than these. I really liked the system in SC2 thou.

 

And its not a conspiracy its simple logic. Even high ranked games are way way better than normal random games in terms of eveness and playability.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BFS]
Beta Tester
1,778 posts
10,706 battles
10 minutes ago, Breezewind said:

I’d rather see the CCs putting their effort into educating the playerbase of how to play well and not get stomped, which they are doing. Discussing the matter is welcome, but this conversation is barely a new one and I’d leave the pitchforks out, even if I get that some people get upset by the matchmaking.

There are enough YouTube videos out there for players to look at suggestions on 'how to play well' that also explain the mechanics of the game.

 

Do all the players watch them - I doubt it.   Even some players who do watch them are not able to replicate that in-game.

 

It's the old saying - "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink".......

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HOO]
Players
1,863 posts
3,558 battles
1 hour ago, Nautical_Metaphor said:

From what many people keep writing on the forum, as well as the personal impression from playing the game, we are increasingly getting very lopsided matchmaking as regards player skills, resulting in an increasing number of "roflstomps" where the team with all the bad players gets wiped off the map very quickly. This sucks for players on both sides, though possibly not quite as hard for those on the winning side as they at least get a win out of it. But if they're not the ones carrying that win, they don't get to do much.

 

This is a dangerous development for WG as well as the players because it sucks the fun out of the game. And if you include the causatory function of WG's predatory marketing techniques, which result in purposely moving players up to higher tiers much faster than their skills develop, it has all the hallmarks of a vicious cycle. Also because, even on the winning side, lesser players by and large don't get to learn much. If your misplays aren't punished, you might often not even recognize them as misplays, or don't reflect on them much.

 

I keep wondering if there really isn't anything that we as players could do to try and steer WG toward a more sustainable, less predatory business model as a whole. Especially in view of the recent postponement of 0.8.0. Or do we really have to rely solely on the CCs raising a big enough stink.

 

This might be a digression fuelled by the respective passage of the most recent Mingles w Jingles video as well as the new Flambass version of the genre, provisionally title "Fun With Hans".

 

In any event, what I'm proposing is not grouping 'bad' players into whole matches of their own, but at least making some form of effort to distribute carry-capable players and "potatoes" evenly on both sides.

 

Give us a balanced MM in general first, i;e don't put 3 or 4 radar boats on one team and leave the other team with none or 1. Balance the ships and their abilities first, then we can worry about the players.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
4,626 posts
10,432 battles
30 minutes ago, principat121 said:

@Nautical_Metaphor

 

Please show an example of a MMO game with teams of multiple players duelling each other where the system  of a MM-system uses a skilled-based asignment in far superior in comparison to a random asignment of players.

 

I bet you cannot.

 

 

 

The "skilled-MM" is a kind of holy grail for some kind of conspiracy theory fans, that fail to understand basic understanding of chance and random.

 

Also, they delude themselves into thinking it would mean they win more. When the only people who would see more wins would be those on the worse end of the spectrum.

 

Or they give nonsense suggestions like "balance it by WR" (even more amusingly coming from someone who thinks WR means nothing) when such an MM would mean everyone would end up very close to 50% and the system would collapse.

 

Games with skill based MM has it only for certain modes (can you name one game that does that? Ah yes.. this one, and I certainly don't struggle to see people complain just as bad about players in ranked as they do in randoms), or they're for single player or very small teams using a ladder system (something that requires a pretty large player population to work).

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
4,626 posts
10,432 battles
15 minutes ago, AdmiralDing3Ling said:

 

Starcraft 2 and Warcraft 3. Both solo and in teamgames. Also WoW Arena. But those are the only PvP games Ive played other than these. I really liked the system in SC2 thou.

 

And its not a conspiracy its simple logic. Even high ranked games are way way better than normal random games in terms of eveness and playability.

 

Show us were either of those have 12 v 12 battles.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PARAZ]
Beta Tester
13,105 posts
18,856 battles
44 minutes ago, AdmiralDing3Ling said:

Starcraft 2 and Warcraft 3. Both solo and in teamgames.

 

Neither has the scale of WoWs. SC2 at least also has a laughably higher population to sustain its ladder system.

 

A mere 20-30k players isn't enough to even remotely sustain any kind of skill based MM in a 12vs12 environment. I reckon the best you could do with that would be 1vs1 as WC3 has similar player numbers (including smurfs) and apparently has humongous queue times for the higher brackets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BLITZ]
Modder
4,576 posts
8,425 battles
2 hours ago, AdmiralDing3Ling said:

Starcraft 2 and Warcraft 3. Both solo and in teamgames. Also WoW Arena. But those are the only PvP games Ive played other than these. I really liked the system in SC2 thou.

So, that are games were teams of multiple players playing against each other?

 

2 hours ago, AdmiralDing3Ling said:

And its not a conspiracy its simple logic. Even high ranked games are way way better than normal random games in terms of eveness and playability.

The selfdeception is strong in this one. High level clan war battles are the textbook expamples of steam roll wins despite the fact that the setup is almost perfect balanced in skill and ships. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,012 posts
4,794 battles

Another 'skill-based mm' thread.

Same old arguments.

Same old responses.

No popcorn for me, I'm afraid, it's surprisingly high in salt and fat.

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HALON]
Players
628 posts
9,982 battles

I stand with the op.

 

i don’t care about wr. I care about games that are not landslide victories or defeats after five minutes. 

 

And games that are undecided till the end are a rare exeption in wows. And this happens because most of them are already decided before starting.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GRKEN]
[GRKEN]
Players
1,090 posts
6,178 battles
8 minutes ago, principat121 said:

So, that are games were teams of multiple players playing against each other?

 

The selfdeseption is strong in this one. High level clan war battles are the textbook expamples of steam roll wins despite the fact that the setup is almost perfect balanced in skill and ships. 

 

Yes, not 12vs12 but you can have 4vs4. I dont really see your point if Im honest. Instead of having several 4vs4 matches going at the same time isnt it possible to have only a few 12vs12 players going at the same time. Considering the very short queue times in this game I really doubt there isnt enough players to make a ladder system.

 

Theres no selfdeception. I wasnt talking about clanbattles (even thou few CBs in my previous clan were steamrolls in either way). I was talking about ranked. But both high ranked and CBs are far more enjoyable in the sense that most players on both teams knows what to do, they wont do random idiotic suicide stuff like in random battles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TS1]
Players
658 posts
8,162 battles
10 minutes ago, Amon_ITA said:

And games that are undecided till the end are a rare exeption in wows. And this happens because most of them are already decided before starting.

No games are decided before starting. I've seen a lot of games where one player proclaims the game is lost upon start (based on player winrate or somesuch) that then end up in a landslide victory.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HALON]
Players
628 posts
9,982 battles
6 minutes ago, Runegrem said:

No games are decided before starting. I've seen a lot of games where one player proclaims the game is lost upon start (based on player winrate or somesuch) that then end up in a landslide victory.

 

One cv 65% win rate , the opponent one 40%

 

2 potato dds, the opponent ones are competent players.

 

Those are 2 examples where victory is decided before the game starts.

 

This is the way it goes. Of course there are exeptions, but are really rare.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
4,626 posts
10,432 battles
4 minutes ago, Amon_ITA said:

 

One cv 65% win rate , the opponent one 40%

 

2 potato dds, the opponent ones are competent players.

 

Those are 2 examples where victory is decided before the game starts.

 

This is the way it goes. Of course there are exeptions, but are really rare.

 

And you decided it was a loss when you checked stats and played as if already was a loss.

 

A 40% player still wins 40% of the time.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BS4]
Players
1,177 posts
6,671 battles

I think most of us will agree that the current system in place is not making for particularly enjoyable game play as OP has stated ATM.

 

The game has evolved quite a lot since day 1. The MM system/team selection system HAS NOT. (APART FROM INTRO OF +2/-2 WICH WAS INTRODUSED BECAUSE OF NUMBERS I BELIVE)

We had an influx of new players a while back when this game was introduced in steam, We are still having an influx of new players who, as op has stated are at WG whim to buy premium ships and progress with silly amounts of xp available to progress faster than there skill set has progressed. Thus we have the issue.

 

This comes uptime and time again with the same old arguments and the same old people saying "give up its never going to change?"

Perhaps if you changed your tune and didn't give up so easily and we all made enough noise and enough POSITIVE sugestions maybe we could make a change regarding this.? Because it DOES need changing.

 

STOP giving WG an excuse not to change things for the better just because you think you cant.:Smile_sceptic:

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HALON]
Players
628 posts
9,982 battles
1 minute ago, AgarwaenME said:

 

And you decided it was a loss when you checked stats and played as if already was a loss.

 

A 40% player still wins 40% of the time.

 

Thats only your assumption, you can’t know how I elaborate the stats I see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×