Matchmaker Discussion Thread & MM Balance

[ImTryingButYouDontHelp]

On 2/13/2021 at 8:35 PM, 159Hunter said:

You do realize what happens if you were to put people in brackets based on WR. They would all move to 50 % and your wr will be a useless metric.

 

That's simply not true. And maybe PR should be the new used metric to identify god players.

 

13 hours ago, gabberworld said:

 

maybe is that you not play actually that good than you think, there is allot discussions about this, that players only farm damage but not actually help team

I don't think many superunicums have his/her stats playing alone. The fact is those "strange long series" of lost battles are not so "random" because they occur too often. I wish WG allowed people to read their MM programming 

[DFens_666]

5 minutes ago, RiggedSantaCrateGuy said:

 

That's simply not true. 

 

So lets say 20 people with 60% WR only play amongst each other... they will keep 60% WR?

[ForlornSailor]

3 minutes ago, RiggedSantaCrateGuy said:

That's simply not true. And maybe PR should be the new used metric to identify god players.

 

- Its not true because ... you say so? thats a nice argument

- PR is not a WG metric. its external, artifically created.

Or do you see a PR rating here anywhere? https://worldofwarships.eu/de/community/accounts/540427929-ForlornSailor/!/pvp/overview/

- Also, PR would be influenced by dividing people by skill. It would also artifically be drawn towards the center, because: PR is based on 3 things: kills, damage, wins. We already know, winrate will be leveled towarsd 50% for all, so that will eliminate one factor of PR. Damage: each game has the same amount of health driving around. So you create skill based environment: bad players WILL deal more damage, since they wont be killed as easy and no unicums around to snatch all the damage. Which means, avg damage will be getting more equal, thus leveling out PR. Same goes for kills. unicums have more kills than bad players. you seperate the unicums from the bad players = there are still 24 ships per game that needs to be sunk. Kills will level out. So, in conclusion: Everyones PR will be getting more equal aswell.

 

btw: see the difference about actually explaining, why something is a bad idea, compared to "no, because I say so"? give it a try.

[ColonelPete]

2 minutes ago, RiggedSantaCrateGuy said:

 

That's simply not true. And maybe PR should be the new used metric to identify god players.

Imagine 400 unicums playing only matches against each other. Will they keep their 60%+ winrating?

And PR includes WR. So that is affected too. And when you let more skilled players play against each other, without changing the overall hitpoints of the ships, the average damage of the players will go down too. And that is a major factor of PR.

And when less skilled players play against each other, they need a similar amount of sunk ships to win. They might take longer to do the damage, but they will get there, increasing their average damage and therefore their PR.

7 minutes ago, RiggedSantaCrateGuy said:

 The fact is those "strange long series" of lost battles are not so "random" because they occur too often. I wish WG allowed people to read their MM programming 

Feel free to check:

Spoiler

1	1	1	1	1	2	1	2	2	1
1	2	2	2	2	1	1	2	1	1
2	2	1	2	1	2	1	1	2	2
2	1	1	2	2	1	2	1	2	2
2	2	2	2	2	1	2	1	2	1
2	2	1	1	2	1	2	2	1	1
1	2	2	1	2	2	2	1	1	2
2	1	2	2	2	1	2	2	1	1
2	1	2	1	2	1	2	2	2	1
1	1	1	2	1	2	2	1	2	1
1	2	1	2	2	1	2	1	1	1
1	2	1	2	2	2	1	1	1	1
2	1	1	1	2	2	2	1	1	2
1	1	1	2	1	1	1	2	1	2
2	2	1	2	1	2	1	1	1	1
2	1	1	2	1	1	1	2	2	1
1	2	2	2	1	1	1	1	2	2
2	1	2	2	2	1	1	1	2	2
1	2	1	2	2	1	1	2	2	1
1	2	2	1	2	2	1	2	1	1
1	2	1	2	1	1	1	1	2	1
1	1	2	2	1	1	1	2	1	1
2	2	1	2	2	1	2	1	2	1
1	1	2	2	1	1	1	1	2	2
2	2	2	1	1	2	1	1	2	1
1	2	1	1	1	2	2	1	1	2
2	1	1	1	2	1	2	2	2	1
2	2	2	2	2	1	2	1	2	2
1	1	2	1	2	1	2	2	1	2
1	1	1	1	1	1	2	2	2	2
2	2	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
2	2	1	2	2	2	1	1	1	2
1	1	1	1	2	1	2	2	1	2
1	1	2	2	1	2	1	2	1	2
1	1	2	1	1	1	2	2	2	1
1	1	2	2	1	2	2	1	2	2
1	2	2	2	1	2	2	2	1	2
2	2	1	2	2	1	1	2	1	2
2	2	1	1	2	2	2	2	1	2
2	1	2	1	1	2	2	1	2	2
2	2	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
1	2	1	1	2	1	1	2	2	1
2	1	1	2	1	2	2	2	2	2
1	2	2	2	1	2	1	2	1	2
1	1	2	2	1	1	1	2	2	1
1	2	1	2	2	2	1	2	1	2
1	1	1	2	2	2	1	2	2	2
1	1	2	2	2	2	2	2	1	2
1	1	2	1	2	2	2	1	1	1
2	2	2	2	1	1	1	1	2	2
1	2	1	1	2	2	1	1	2	1
1	1	2	1	1	1	1	2	1	2
2	2	1	1	1	2	2	1	1	1
2	2	1	1	2	2	2	2	1	1
1	1	1	2	2	1	2	2	1	2
2	1	1	2	2	2	1	2	2	1
2	1	1	2	2	1	2	2	1	2
2	2	2	1	2	2	1	1	2	1
2	1	2	2	1	1	2	1	1	2
2	1	1	2	2	1	2	2	2	2
2	1	2	1	1	1	2	1	2	2
2	2	2	2	1	1	2	2	1	1
2	1	2	1	1	2	1	1	2	2
1	1	2	1	2	2	1	1	1	2
2	1	1	2	2	1	2	2	1	1
1	2	2	2	1	1	2	2	2	2
2	1	1	1	2	2	1	2	2	2
2	1	2	2	2	1	1	1	2	2
2	1	1	1	2	2	1	1	2	2
2	2	2	1	2	1	1	2	1	2
1	2	1	1	1	1	1	2	2	1
2	1	2	2	2	1	1	1	2	2
2	2	1	2	2	1	1	2	2	1
1	1	1	1	1	2	1	2	2	1
1	1	1	1	1	1	2	1	2	2
2	1	2	2	2	1	1	1	2	2
2	2	2	1	1	1	2	2	2	2
1	2	1	2	1	2	2	1	2	1
2	2	2	2	2	2	1	1	2	2
1	2	1	1	2	2	1	1	1	1
1	1	2	1	2	2	1	1	1	2
2	1	1	2	2	1	2	2	1	2
1	2	1	1	2	2	2	1	2	1
1	2	1	1	1	1	2	1	1	2
2	2	1	2	1	1	1	1	2	2
1	2	2	2	1	1	2	2	1	1
1	1	2	2	1	1	2	1	1	2
1	2	2	2	1	2	2	1	1	1
2	1	1	2	2	2	2	2	2	2
1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	2	1
1	1	2	1	2	1	2	2	2	1
2	1	2	1	1	1	2	2	2	1
2	1	2	1	1	2	1	1	1	2
2	2	2	1	1	2	1	2	1	2
2	2	2	2	2	1	1	2	2	2
2	2	2	2	2	2	2	1	1	1
1	2	2	2	1	2	1	2	2	1
1	1	2	1	2	1	2	1	1	1
1	1	1	2	1	2	1	2	2	1
2	1	1	2	1	2	1	1	2	2

https://www.random.org/integers/?num=1000&min=1&max=2&col=10&base=10&format=html&rnd=new

 

[ImTryingButYouDontHelp]

34 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

So lets say 20 people with 60% WR only play amongst each other... they will keep 60% WR?

 

Obviosly, not all 60% WRs play the same. At the end, there would be differences. You saw KOTS anytime?. They are all superunicums, and some teams win sistematically the others. Why? 

 

32 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

- Its not true because ... you say so? thats a nice argument

- PR is not a WG metric. its external, artifically created.

Or do you see a PR rating here anywhere? https://worldofwarships.eu/de/community/accounts/540427929-ForlornSailor/!/pvp/overview/

- Also, PR would be influenced by dividing people by skill. It would also artifically be drawn towards the center, because: PR is based on 3 things: kills, damage, wins. We already know, winrate will be leveled towarsd 50% for all, so that will eliminate one factor of PR. Damage: each game has the same amount of health driving around. So you create skill based environment: bad players WILL deal more damage, since they wont be killed as easy and no unicums around to snatch all the damage. Which means, avg damage will be getting more equal, thus leveling out PR. Same goes for kills. unicums have more kills than bad players. you seperate the unicums from the bad players = there are still 24 ships per game that needs to be sunk. Kills will level out. So, in conclusion: Everyones PR will be getting more equal aswell.

 

btw: see the difference about actually explaining, why something is a bad idea, compared to "no, because I say so"? give it a try.

It depends on what you call a "good player" to clasify players in the MM. A 60% WR player is not the same as a 67% WR. So you would always get differences between the teams....but not so huge as right now, which make this game BORING and TOO FRUSTRATING (this is what WG uses to male people "OP" ships) because you know you can't carry many battles. I give a sh@# about more extreme WRs, I want a more funny and engaging game. You are too focused on "My d#ck is bigger than yours", aka WR.

[Seepheerd]

[gabberworld]

47 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

So lets say 20 people with 60% WR only play amongst each other... they will keep 60% WR?

 

yes , if one match they lose and another they win

[ForlornSailor]

5 minutes ago, RiggedSantaCrateGuy said:

It depends on what you call a "good player" to clasify players in the MM. A 60% WR player is not the same as a 67% WR. So you would always get differences between the teams....but not so huge as right now, which make this game BORING and TOO FRUSTRATING (this is what WG uses to male people "OP" ships) because you know you can't carry many battles. I give a sh@# about more extreme WRs, I want a more funny and engaging game. You are too focused on "My d#ck is bigger than yours", aka WR. 

 

No, im not. thats what you are projecting to have a reason to be angry at anyone, that disagrees with you. Your skillbased approach is not going to make a difference. Because what you claim, wouldnt be a problem for high WR players, you do ignore for the low skill ones. There, all of a sudden, 40% is 40%. 40% can be "I yolo in the 2nd minute my DD in center cap" OR 40% can be "I hug the border with muh Yamato shooting HE".

 

The boring and frustrating games do NOT come from skill difference, they come from LOW SKILL. They come from WG selling and giving access of high tier ships to absolute new players. And if you seperate the bad players into their own universe- guess what - they will never even have a chance to become better. I actually want them to become good players, this is what the game needs, you understand that? new players that develope a decent level of skill. This is a complete ther point of your "lock all bad players into bad player gulag". The game will die down, seperated into different kinds of universes. Oh and also: People could just install bots or send their ships into randoms via remote connection from work all they long, to lower their stats. then in the evening, they get super matchmaking when they are playing themself, becuase they have dropped to 0 PR and 34% WR. And why would people do that, you ask? Because A) then you get WAY better rewards for playing, you know, XP and credits, because that is what the game is all about. Dont you think a huge mass of suiciding people, to get better matchmaking, would completly destroy the game?

 

Also:

 

You talk about "not beeing able to carry games" which is boring and frustrating - with skillbased mm you would NEVER be able to carry a game, since there is no opponents left that would let you carry, you understand that, right? this is complelty irrelevant to the skill level (if it would be implemented in a way you want) because... ah well im tired of typing. I dont think you will accept what we tell you anyway. You have your mind set, right? For you, its not a discussion, right?

[DFens_666]

1 minute ago, gabberworld said:

 

yes , if one match they lose and another they win

 

Thats 50%, not 60%?

[gabberworld]

7 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Thats 50%, not 60%?

 

if user have already 60% winrate then it stay same, 60%

[DFens_666]

Just now, gabberworld said:

 

if user have already 60% winrate then it stay same, 60%

 

So if i have 60% WR, and i win 1 game and lose 1 game, i still have 60% WR... allright. Please tell me you are trolling?

 

Lets take an example:

We take 20 players wth 60% WR, and everyone has played 10 games, so thats 6w and 4l.

We let them play 10 times against each other, now they have 20 games.

10 of them get 6 wins and 4 losses.

The other 10 get 4 wins and 6 losses.

10 players now have 20 games with 12 wins and 8 losses, they still have 60% WR.

The other 10 players now have 20 games with 10 wins and 10 losses. Their WR is now 50%. And so you are dragging everyone down to 50%, while at the same time, you will reduce the size of the brackets more and more.

[gabberworld]

2 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

So if i have 60% WR, and i win 1 game and lose 1 game, i still have 60% WR... allright. Please tell me you are trolling?

 

 

not trolling at all, your status stays same, you need 2 wins and 1 lose for increase winrate, or 2 losses and 1 win for  lose winrate

[DFens_666]

5 minutes ago, gabberworld said:

 

not trolling at all, your status stays same, you need 2 wins and 1 lose for increase winrate, or 2 losses and 1 win for  lose winrate

 

Thats only true for one scenario: 50% WR. For everything else, 1 win and 1 loss can either decrease or increase your WR, depending where you come from.

 

Next example

You have played 1 game, you won it. What is your WR?

You play another game, now you lose. What is your WR now?

[gabberworld]

10 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Next example

You have played 1 game, you won it. What is your WR?

You play another game, now you lose. What is your WR now?

 

i already told you that, if you play 2 battles in row 1 win and 1 lose it stay same no matter what winrate you currently have

 

yes its 50% if you calculate 2 battles like that, but it also means 0% because you not actually win or lose nothing

 

[ForlornSailor]

16 minutes ago, gabberworld said:

i already told you that, if you play 2 battles in row 1 win and 1 lose it stay same no matter what winrate you currently have

 

yes its 50% if you calculate 2 battles like that, but it also means 0% because you not actually win or lose nothing

 

You are having a logic-flaw in your thinking. Or you two talk about two different things. Ill try to resolve this with an easy example:

 

Imagine a new player, he just starts the game. He plays 8 games on the first day. He loses them all. He has thus 0% Winrate, right? right.

He plays 2 games on his second day. He wins one, he loses one. On this day, his Winrate is 50%. right? right.

Now he has 10 games overall. Whats the winrate showing on this account?

[DFens_666]

24 minutes ago, gabberworld said:

 

i already told you that, if you play 2 battles in row 1 win and 1 lose it stay same no matter what winrate you currently have

 

 

I can only explain it to you, if you keep an open mind and concider, that i might be right with what im saying, so last try:

 

What is 100% WR? 100% WR is you WON every game you have EVER played. So if you play 1 game, and you win that, you have 100% WR.

That should be clear, right?

1 game: 1 win = 100% WR

2 games: 2 wins = 100% WR

10 games: 10 wins = 100% WR

Makes sense, right?

 

Ok, so now we move on. Our guy with 10 games and 10 wins plays 2 more games. He now loses one and wins one.

12 games: 11 wins - 1 loss = ??% WR

91,66% WR

He doesnt have won all games, so he cant have 100% WR anymore. So if you win 1 and lose 1, you dont get the same what you previously had.

[gabberworld]

5 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

I can only explain it to you, if you keep an open mind and concider, that i might be right with what im saying, so last try:

 

What is 100% WR? 100% WR is you WON every game you have EVER played. So if you play 1 game, and you win that, you have 100% WR.

That should be clear, right?

1 game: 1 win = 100% WR

2 games: 2 wins = 100% WR

10 games: 10 wins = 100% WR

Makes sense, right?

 

Ok, so now we move on. Our guy with 10 games and 10 wins plays 2 more games. He now loses one and wins one.

12 games: 11 wins - 1 loss = ??% WR

91,66% WR

He doesnt have won all games, so he cant have 100% WR anymore. So if you win 1 and lose 1, you dont get the same what you previously had.

 

yes, of course they calculate like that, total battles versus winrate %.

 

 

[GarrusBrutus]

3 minutes ago, gabberworld said:

yes, of course they calculate like that, total battles versus winrate.

so 20 players with all 60% wr after lets say 100 games. (60v 40l)

they play a thousand games among each other and since theyre all more or less the same skill level they will have close to 50% wr in those games.

So 20 players with 1100 games played (560v 540l) and get 50.9% wr.

See?

 

[Excavatus]

1 hour ago, ColonelPete said:

Feel free to check:

I've felt strangely satisfied after rolling this up and down for a while. 

Longer than I want to admit.... 

 

[gabberworld]

4 minutes ago, GarrusBrutus said:

so 20 players with all 60% wr after lets say 100 games. (60v 40l)

they play a thousand games among each other and since theyre all more or less the same skill level they will have close to 50% wr in those games.

So 20 players with 1100 games played (560v 540l) and get 50.9% wr.

See?

 

 

there is one thing tho game self not seems use comma soo its either 51% or 50%

[zekai7498]

18 saat önce, gabberworld dedi:

 

maybe is that you not play actually that good than you think, there is allot discussions about this, that players only farm damage but not actually help team

i dont have smolensk,no matter whatever i do,MM dumping me to potato field.over and over again.

[gabberworld]

5 minutes ago, zekai7498 said:

i dont have smolensk,no matter whatever i do,MM dumping me to potato field.over and over again.

 

i had this 5 days row too in last month, my winrate drop at then the 0.30%

[159Hunter]

6 hours ago, gabberworld said:

 

there is one thing tho game self not seems use comma soo its either 51% or 50%

You don't understand the mathematical point do you?

Why on earth would you do skillbased mm if all it does is skew your number that "defines" your skill level? 

 

As for people stating PR is a better indication than WR. It is not. If I find tje time I'll explain in detail with the only factor in wows that matters: a spreadsheet.

[SV_Kompresor]

7 hours ago, gabberworld said:

 

i already told you that, if you play 2 battles in row 1 win and 1 lose it stay same no matter what winrate you currently have

 

yes its 50% if you calculate 2 battles like that, but it also means 0% because you not actually win or lose nothing

 

What the hell did I just read?

[gabberworld]

Just now, SV_Kompresor said:

What the hell did I just read?

 

i may say this other way as well. i give you 100 euros and then you give me 100 euro back, how much euros you have now?

 

i give you 200 euros and you give me back 100 euros, how much you have now?