Matchmaker Discussion Thread & MM Balance

[GarrusBrutus]

1 hour ago, Greuter29 said:

Well one thing is to look for a way to end the match when the match is already considered over.

So when some pepegas on my team rush to their deaths I am punished even more by not even being granted the opportunity to turn the match around? That's a bad idea imo. 

 

How about give the team that loses a teammate a slight buff like in arms race? If you lose a ship first you get 5% faster reload for example. And it increases as you lose more friendlies, while it decreases as you close the gap. That would give the losing team a chance to come back into the game and perhaps less one sided games. 

[Greuter29]

1 hour ago, GarrusBrutus said:

So when some pepegas on my team rush to their deaths I am punished even more by not even being granted the opportunity to turn the match around? That's a bad idea imo. 

 

How about give the team that loses a teammate a slight buff like in arms race? If you lose a ship first you get 5% faster reload for example. And it increases as you lose more friendlies, while it decreases as you close the gap. That would give the losing team a chance to come back into the game and perhaps less one sided games. 

The match is lost, sure your 70% WR so you might think you can still turn it around.  But we are not talking about these cases here.
You must have had sooo many pepegas occasionally on your team that you still can't form a dent in the enemy team sufficient enough to call it even winable.
Note that in your case these games are losses too. Be it may a larger portion, they will still count as a loss. (and if it is a win equally it is still a win but a smaller portion compared to what others have).
Also note that we are talking about 5% out of the matches. Which means 2.5% would be a loss and 2.5% would be a win. (for mathematicians out there not true but still very close to this).

In theory by my estimate we are talking about 2,5% which in your case to 30% losses would be relative to less then 10% of your total losses. Meaning 10% of your games that ended in a loss you would save time AND here is the big one: A whole lot of frustration to play another 10 minutes of playing a game in which you are not going to change the outcome (yes you still farm dmg and XP and PR and what not) 

 

[Aethervoxx]

MM is working as WG intends - that much is clear.

As to MM balance? There is none as far as I can tell.

Sure, one sees a small % of 'even battle results. However, the proof that there is no MM balance are the many % battles that are one sided or even worse, the 'roflstomps' (W or L).

All one can do is try the best one can & hope your team has a few better players than the enemy team. 

Having RNG on your side also is a big factor but then 'that' is a second balance issue entirely. 

 

[Greuter29]

Or just prove it:

How many matches (with screen shot / replay) have you had where the enemy has had a lead of 50-500 points + a ship difference of 5 ships at minute 4; And you still won the match?

[Greuter29]

3 minutes ago, Aethervoxx said:

As to MM balance? There is none as far as I can tell.

There is none as to player skils, WG confirmed.

And that is fine in my opinion. Only down side is that occasionally you get really offset teams (both in your favor and disadvantage)

[GarrusBrutus]

32 minutes ago, Greuter29 said:

Or just prove it:

How many matches (with screen shot / replay) have you had where the enemy has had a lead of 50-500 points + a ship difference of 5 ships at minute 4; And you still won the match?

Prove what? That those kind of matches are unwinnable? That those kind of matches happen 1 in every 20 matches or so?

Fact is that where some players give up when they deem their team's disadvantage too great to overcome, other players keep on fighting to the last second, sometimes even crawling their way back into the match. Such matches often turn out to be the most fun to play, win or lose. Unfortunately this is a rare occurance since most of the time you simply lose the match due to players giving up. But in my opinion going down fighting is far more desirable than the "GG" in chat when you lose two or three ships early.

 

 

[ForlornSailor]

44 minutes ago, Greuter29 said:

How many matches (with screen shot / replay) have you had where the enemy has had a lead of 50-500 points + a ship difference of 5 ships at minute 4; And you still won the match?

 

But what exactly do you think, would change? That you could recover from such a disadvantage? Or that such a disadvantage doesnt happen in the first place? Neither would be the case. You get unlucky and take a torp as a DD early, someone detonates, people make mistakes - this happens regardless of skill. Yes, people with higher skill make less mistakes but it still happens. And then the snowball effect kicks in. Even worse: if you would create the perfect environment with 2 teams with all equally skilled players (which isnt possible in randoms but lets say it would) - losing 1 or 2 ships early because of bad luck would tip the game even harder into a state, from where you cant recover. You can see this in clanbattles, when you lose one on your side early, its a huge disadvantage, even if your team is on paper "higher skilled" you might lose the game due to that. This is just the way this game is, no respawn plays a huge part in that.

[Bear__Necessities]

8 hours ago, Aethervoxx said:

it's your solo play that makes the difference

But that's fundamentally true. The better you are. The more influence you have. The better chances of winning. It's quite simple really. 

[Bear__Necessities]

11 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

Dont let WG see your DD results - they will nerf the class even more 

If they dare!!! *shakes fist dramatically*

[Greuter29]

1 hour ago, GarrusBrutus said:

Prove what? That those kind of matches are unwinnable? That those kind of matches happen 1 in every 20 matches or so?

uh yeah that.

I guess I have the responsibility to prove the 1 out 20 myself.

[Greuter29]

1 hour ago, GarrusBrutus said:

most of the time you simply lose the match due to players giving up.

I rarely see people ALT+F4 , and even if they do: Most are getting a ban in the current settings from WG.

So most people are not simply giving up

[Greuter29]

1 hour ago, GarrusBrutus said:

going down fighting is far more desirable than the "GG" in chat when you lose two or three ships early.

I agree 100 % . (also stated earlier this is not just 2 or 3 ships, a little more than that).

 

Doesn't result in a different outcome though
(I am talking of those matches where you don't lose a single ship [or close to that] on your team or enemy)

[DFens_666]

27 minutes ago, Bear__Necessities said:

If they dare!!! *shakes fist dramatically*

[GarrusBrutus]

13 minutes ago, Greuter29 said:

I agree 100 % . (also stated earlier this is not just 2 or 3 ships, a little more than that).

 

Doesn't result in a different outcome though
(I am talking of those matches where you don't lose a single ship [or close to that] on your team or enemy)

Yeah, i think it is inherently in the game design that you have these kind of games.

No respawn mechanic, slow paced and mechanics like detonations and LOTS of RNG involved means it is a bit like balancing a tube of water on your finger: Once the balance is off to one side, the water floes to that side and it falls of your finger.

It is the same with WoWs. Once a team gets an advantage over the other team its more likely that the "winning" team increases the advantage than for the losing team to overcome the odds.

 

For example: The only DD on a flank gets dev struck or detonates. This will most likely lead to a collapsed flank and ultimately a collapsed team. How do you recover from that as a random team?

 

ps. you can multiquote in one message. ;)

 

[Greuter29]

28 minutes ago, GarrusBrutus said:

Yeah, i think it is inherently in the game design that you have these kind of games.

No just common sense. It is random.
You could slap some numbers to it with math. Doesn't change the fact it is random.

[Greuter29]

[_Teob_]

OK so I deleted a LOT of messages here that were just arguments and personal attacks.

 

The only reason why there are no sanctions being handed out is because I totally understand that this topic makes people very angry and angry people say things they don't mean.

Having said that, please stop arguing endlessly. Stop attacking each other and just stick to the topic.

 

As always, my only request is try to be nice to each other and remember that nobody wins when you argue over the internet.

[zekai7498]

08.11.2020 saat 19:12'de, domen3 dedi:

The weekend warrior meme isn't really relevant anymore as this stuff happens way too often during the week too.

yeah,4 games today 4 strait loss example 1;

 

[StraightUpYourA]

Been tracking this tread and started looking at the mmmonitor every game for the past week. Maybe I don't get the point, but Most of the games the average difference between the teams is 1-2% in WR of the ships and the overall. Yes every game you have 1-2 players with a PR of 200 but thats mostly on both sides. Maybe the only possibility to balance is number of battles per player but i did see players with 1000 and wr of 55% and other with over 10,000 and wr of 41%. So they balance capabilities but it will be impossible to balance skill as far as I can see it.

I did look after each match and seen that there is almost no correlation between the PR and the actual battle score

It will be nice if we could track MM vs Actual score on a large sample to see the correlation. 

[DFens_666]

13 minutes ago, raz207 said:

Maybe I don't get the point, but Most of the games the average difference between the teams is 1-2% in WR of the ships and the overall.

 

Most people are just unhappy when they get a losing streak and then come here, showing the worst possible results to make a point how unbalanced MM is. Then you dont hear them for the next couple of weeks when its average or even when they get winning streaks, because why should they?

If someone wants to work against losing streaks, there are only 2 ways to prevent them:

- Git gud

- Play in 3x divisions with good players (thus you need to git gud yourself first)

Problem solved.

But nowadays, people rather complain and want the easy way out to get what they want instead of investing even the slightest amount of effort.

[Greuter29]

50 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

If someone wants to work against losing streaks, there are only 2 ways to prevent them:

- Git gud

- Play in 3x divisions with good players (thus you need to git gud yourself first)

100% true. It is not even necessary to play in a div with good players exclusively. Diving up enables you to use teamwork more efficient.

However as a case shown by zekai there are the odd battles that show disproportionate results, now this inherent to a true random MM. This is not really the problem.
The problem is that frequently these battles last for more then 12 minutes in the higher Tier regions. (@Zekai7498 I would love to know from the detailed report how long the battle actually lasted)
The battles that are so lob-sided AND take ages to grind through are not enjoyable for both sides. And in my mind nobody is the winner in such a match.
Now if this would just take 5-6 minutes and move on, fine. Just had a bad battle lets hop into the next one and move on with it.

Just for clarity I am stating that in 100 battles I only experience such a battle maybe 2 or 3 times in a negative outcome.
Equally I will be on that other team 2 or 3 times in 100 battles.

The majority of the other battle 95 out of 100 are just fine and we all enjoy them losses and wins.
It just happens to some battles. Around 1 out 20 is my estimate. Where you get that sour taste and are playing a match for 15 minutes everyone is willing to end sooner the better, whether you win or lose it does not matter.

[ForlornSailor]

31 minutes ago, Greuter29 said:

However as a case shown by zekai there are the odd battles that show disproportionate results, now this inherent to a true random MM. This is not really the problem.
The problem is that frequently these battles last for more then 12 minutes in the higher Tier regions. (@Zekai7498 I would love to know from the detailed report how long the battle actually lasted)
The battles that are so lob-sided AND take ages to grind through are not enjoyable for both sides. And in my mind nobody is the winner in such a match.
Now if this would just take 5-6 minutes and move on, fine. Just had a bad battle lets hop into the next one and move on with it.

 

Well, the thing is: its worthwhile for even the losing side to drag this game on, since it will increase your credit and XP income. You might have some nice signals and camos on. A 5 min loss is often in the region of 300 to 450 base XP. But a losing battle, where you do good and fight for several minutes, eventhough you know is lost, can get you pass 1000 base XP very easy, sometimes even up to 2000 base XP. Then the game is, eventhough a loss, very worthwhile.

 

And its dangerous to try and implement an environment, where people are like "ah thats lost, lets go to the next game" - you will flip the entire game sooner or later by that. People will just quit 2 mins in, after one ship died. And this would happen in each and every game at some point, if we make it not worthwhile to keep fighting a losing battle. Then you created what you tried to avoid in the first place.

[Greuter29]

6 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

Well, the thing is: its worthwhile for even the losing side to drag this game on

One thing at the time.
Joy in the game first, -> this keeps us all playing
Then the rewarding system.

Although granted changes in the duration of the game or game ending does affect the reward system

[DFens_666]

23 minutes ago, Greuter29 said:

One thing at the time.
Joy in the game first, -> this keeps us all playing
Then the rewarding system.

Although granted changes in the duration of the game or game ending does affect the reward system

 

In the end, which type of game is least fun is subjective to every person.

I dislike 5 mins losses the most. Cant do anything, wont even get decent XP.

Followed by wins, where you couldnt do anything, because you also get bad rewards.

[Greuter29]

@DFens_666 Valid point.

So lets turn it upside down.

Changing the win conditions would benefit the people that get infuriated by long drawn out battle. But equally it will increase the number of battles ending in just 5 minutes. Thus for others this might be infuriating. That is a conundrum .. 
But honestly why do you dislike them? Because of the rewards out of those short battles or because of the short battle time? Or something else?

Also a fair mention if you don't want 5 minute losses just GIT GUD. Those battles will increase in length when you just play better (Benefit you get even more rewards, although in my opinion the reward increase is not really your effort).
On the notion of wins where you might have well been AFK... yeah that is just random battles, want to change that you would have to look at non-random MM.