Matchmaker Discussion Thread & MM Balance

[ForlornSailor]

9 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

• it is easier
• more time to practice aiming and surviving
• more time to learn some of the maps that are relevant for Tier V

- coop is easier aswell. So shall we abandon randoms now?

- are you suggesting, its HIS fault, that the enemys still had 7 ships alive? he should have gunned down 4 BBs among other stuff with his Anshan?

- the one map is a T8+. You literally never get it when playing protected matchmaking. So how would he be learning that map.

 

Can you maybe stop defending WG on every single topic? They will not shower you with money, if it hasnt happened at this point. New players have a horrible time getting into the game these days and playing 200 games against bots OR against a few humans, that have also only played mostly against Bots does not prepare you for the game.

[ColonelPete]

1 minute ago, ForlornSailor said:

- coop is easier aswell. So shall we abandon randoms now?

- are you suggesting, its HIS fault, that the enemys still had 7 ships alive? he should have gunned down 4 BBs among other stuff with his Anshan?

- the one map is a T8+. You literally never get it when playing protected matchmaking. So how would he be learning that map.

 

Can you maybe stop defending WG on every single topic? They will not shower you with money, if it hasnt happened at this point. New players have a horrible time getting into the game these days and playing 200 games against bots OR against a few humans, that have also only played mostly against Bots does not prepare you for the game.

• when you are not ready for random, yes
• no
• by increasing Tier slowly, when playing Tier V, you play on Tier VII maps from time to time, when ready to progress, you play Tier VI and play Tier VIII maps from time to time....
• that is not defending, I am giving him his options, when he feels ready for more, he can advance, when he complains, he is not ready

[DFens_666]

9 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

that is not defending, I am giving him his options, when he feels ready for more, he can advance, when he complains, he is not ready

 

So he will get better teammates when he "finishes" his 200 games in protected MM?

The only way to teach people anything in protected MM, would be to actually put smarter bots in there. Bots in protected MM literally dont even hit you, and often they start staring contests with other bots and you can do a drive-by or yolo torp them with your DD. No wonder DD players suck after exiting protected MM, when all they did down there is torp everything to dust from 1km. Suddenly, human opposition doesnt just yolo into you and deal 0 damage while you can just farm them.

It teaches bad habits - nothing more.

[Wolf_Harms]

The Matchmaking in WoWS (as it is now) is only frustrating for all players who are not among the "aces" and "veterans" yet.
It MUST be changed to have the fairest chances for BOTH teams to gain victory.
If they keep it the way it is, more and more players will jump off - when I play a battle, I want an even chance for my team to win.
But since I am a mediocre player, I will rather land in the bad team. The frustration about always loosing is so big, that I will stop.
And I cannot change my "quality stats" so easily anymore, cause I knew nothing about this in the beginning, and now my
stats are rather bad. But even a bad player would like to get a similarly bad player on the opposite side - a balance.
 

Matchmaking as in school day teams will always result in unbalance. When two captains took turns in selecting their team players,
the one who started would always have the better team (see graphic).
There would be another way how to select the players - a "squarewave selection" would result in much more balanced teams.

 

In my example, number 1 is the best, and number 14 the worst player. 

 

[COPlUM]

2 hours ago, Wolf_Harms said:

And I cannot change my "quality stats" so easily anymore

That is not true and I will prove it to you. I thought this too, my stats were identical to yours 9 months ago with exactly the same amount of battles played, I was probably even worse. The issue you are having, the issue I was having and the issue every potato has is you keep doing the same thing over and over and/or blaming your team. Blaming your team makes no sense, the average winrate is 50%, therefor over thousands of games the average winrate of your teammates and your opponents is always 50%. You have to play with the mindset that both teams have a 50% chance of winning, because it might be 40%/60% in your current match, statistically it's going to be 60%/40% in your next match.

 

On average -stats are a collection of averages- the only differentiating factor is how well you play. You can improve yourself not by spamming games but by taking a break and learning game mechanics, really learn them, don't just watch 3 unicum replays and try to copy what he does, study the game. Every single guy with purple stats took his/her time to study the game. I did this 9 months ago and give purple stats guys a real run for their money now.

 

Also change your mindset when you play, if you want to increase your winrate, you should only have one thing on your mind, every 5 seconds ingame you update your brain and think "What do I do now to increase my chance of winning" If you do the math and realize you can win by running out the clock, run, hide, run out the clock. Stop thinking about what you need to do to get more xp, or credits, or damage, always think what you need to do to win, if that means you smoke someone up and spot for them, you do it, even if it means the other guy gets the damage done and you don't. Bigger damage numbers, xp and credits are a side-effect of winning, not the other way around. There's plenty of time to farm out a battleship at the end of a round to pad your damage numbers after you secured a win.

 

Your progress over 9 months - Stagnant, you're actually getting worse

 

 

My progress over 9 months - Going up like a rocket

 

 

Have you memorized armor schemes? Have you memorized penetration values of all shells? Do you know exactly where the citadel is on all ships so you know where to shoot? Have you memorized at what distances you can be greedy and go for devastating strikes and at what distances being greedy would result in 0 damage and you would have done much more going for the upper belt or HE? If you answered no to any of these questions, you have not done what it takes to git gud -& you can't expect to git gud.

A very simple thing you can do to help you git gud is install matchmaking monitor and use it in two ways

1) Let it calm you down, after a few days you will see that you get the best team just as often as you get the bad team.
2) Find out who the highest win rate player on your team is and watch him play after you die.

Stop looking for excuses in the matchmaker, you'll end up with 45% winrate and twenty thousand battles played, then it really is too late to do anything about your stats and you'll hide them like everyone else with 45% and 20K games.

Your stats will go up hard too if you study game mechanics and change your mindset from "muh matchmaker no fair" to "what do I do to win"

 

[DFens_666]

3 hours ago, Wolf_Harms said:

It MUST be changed to have the fairest chances for BOTH teams to gain victory.

 

Thats already the case, since (usually) both teams have the same amount of CV/BB/DD/Cruiser and both teams have the same tier ships aswell. There is no inherit imbalance between teams, by giving one team a CV and the other not f.e.

Your proposal means, there is no need to become a better player. If both teams have an equal chance to win by default, then skill essentially becomes useless. Why should i thrive to become better, if that means that the enemies also have a better player? If i play bad = 50% WR. If i play good = 50% WR. One requires effort on my part, the other not.

That would be if 2 people have the same job, and one guy works 8h and the other 4h and both get the same wage. Id just take the 4h job, because why put in more effort for zero gain?

 

A system where someone who is better gets better result is as fair as it can be. If you improve yourself, you win more.

 

3 hours ago, Wolf_Harms said:

But since I am a mediocre player, I will rather land in the bad team. The frustration about always loosing is so big, that I will stop.

And I cannot change my "quality stats" so easily anymore, cause I knew nothing about this in the beginning, and now my
stats are rather bad. But even a bad player would like to get a similarly bad player on the opposite side - a balance.

 

Here i dont see the connection. Sure your team will have a slightly worse chance of winning because you already take up on spot. But thats only true as long as you are a below average player. If you try to get better, then your team has a better chance of winning.

If you want to become better, make a new thread and ask for help. Upload some replays, so others can watch them and give you pointers. Here are enough people around who are willing to help you, if you want to become a better player. Its your choice.

[COPlUM]

30 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Why should i thrive to become better. If i play bad = 50% WR. If i play good = 50% WR. One requires effort on my part, the other not.

I love how you accidentally explained why karl marx was a moron and people starve under communism while you were writing this. Why would I spend 12 hours a day planting crops? It doesn't matter, everyone's equal, my children get just as much food as some other guy who doesn't care.
B...b...but maybe you will do your best for the collective?
No, we're not bees, there is no hive, screw you.
*A wild food shortage appears*

[COPlUM]

Just one example I see multiple times a day

Team A) 400 points ahead with 1 half dead remaining cruiser, 2 minutes to play
Team B) Full HP BB chasing the cruiser

If the last remaining ship is a 45% or hidden profile player, he will shoot the BB and risk getting deleted + losing to do an extra 10K damage.
If the last remaining ship is a 55% player, he will go dark and not shoot because he understands that rewards are multiplied by X1,5 if he wins.

If the last remaining ship is a 60% player, he will shoot back at exactly the right time, factoring in the reload time of the BB chasing him to do an extra 5K seconds before the game ends.

This isn't the matchmaker, this isn't wargaming, it's one guy without a brain, one guy using half of his brain and one guy using his entire brain.

[159Hunter]

12 hours ago, Besserwisser3000 said:

What time this game was it irrelevant. No MM should do that. Even if you form teams of 4 players per side, you don`t put one div in one and then give them one BB and the other team a cruiser.

I have never seen another game with equally shitty MM. Why should I blame low IQ players for doing crap the game should not allow them to do? It`s WGs fault.

Who is to blame for the fact that a low IQ brainlet can take out a unicum DD in his brokenly overpowered CV? WG. Nobody else.

WG MM is designed to get people to play asap. Hence the cap on the queue time. It's all part of their business model.

What this also shows is the reason why skill based MM can never work. At odd hours there aren't even enough players to fill a match without taking skills into account.

 

12 hours ago, Besserwisser3000 said:

Stable numbers in a growing market. Let`s talk more about how to [edited]up your own game. Check out what happens if Apple announces "stable sales numbers" even at an increased revenue. The share price goes down.

Ot it's just a niche game. If this were such a popular game type a lot more companies would start developping them to cash in as well.

12 hours ago, Besserwisser3000 said:

Like I said, they could have easily doubled the numbers by making competent decisions.

Pure speculation.

12 hours ago, Besserwisser3000 said:

Their entire dev team is a) arrogant and b) incompetent. A bad mix.

 

 

Sorry, but in my company, the entire dev team would be gone by now.

Why do you still play? Yes they make quenstionable decisions, but they make good ones as well. 

If this were your company you as a boss would have failed. And you can probably get away with firing an entire team once, do it a second time and you'll have issues filling a third team.

11 hours ago, ForlornSailor said:

I dont think either time or fail division is an acceptable excuse for that. Not the first time we see this either. Especially for the New York to be sucked into this to "balance" the game... disgusting. He atleast did nothing wrong.

It's not an excuse, it's how MM works. WG is not in the business of making perfect line ups, they want games to start quickly.

11 hours ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

btw: testing the last days, new accounts are seeing 85 to 100% bots in games below T5 in the protected matchmaker and even accounts above 200 games playing low tiers (T4) are starting to see bots in random games on saturday evening after 23 CET. Let that sink in. Even on a saturday evening, not that late, this game cant keep up a healthy population on T4 any longer. I dont even want to talk about, what new players learn, when playing 200 games against almost only bots and then jump into... Thunderer. WG should be concerned at this point.

Honestly, 23 CET is late for me. I try to avoid PC that late as it messes with my sleep.

[ColonelPete]

5 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

 

So he will get better teammates when he "finishes" his 200 games in protected MM?

The only way to teach people anything in protected MM, would be to actually put smarter bots in there. Bots in protected MM literally dont even hit you, and often they start staring contests with other bots and you can do a drive-by or yolo torp them with your DD. No wonder DD players suck after exiting protected MM, when all they did down there is torp everything to dust from 1km. Suddenly, human opposition doesnt just yolo into you and deal 0 damage while you can just farm them.

It teaches bad habits - nothing more.

He gets the same teammates as everyone.

[GarrusBrutus]

2 hours ago, NikolayKuznetsov said:

Your stats will go up hard too if you study game mechanics and change your mindset from "muh matchmaker no fair" to "what do I do to win"

[COPlUM]

4 minutes ago, GarrusBrutus said:

 

I am Arthur, King of the Britains. Good sir knight, will you come with me to Camelot and join us at the round table?

[Wolf_Harms]

5 hours ago, NikolayKuznetsov said:

Your stats will go up hard too if you study game mechanics and change your mindset from "muh matchmaker no fair" to "what do I do to win"

 

 

Sorry, but that is all very fine - and thanks for the fish! - but it would not explain why MY team looses most all the battles.
Because for every "potatoe" like me in my team, there would be a similar potatoe in the other team, if MATCHMAKING was even balanced - which it is obviously NOT.

 

And no - I an definitely NOT getting worse - how could anyone get worse with more practise?
You are totally fixated on those curves, which do not tell the whole story.
I am doing many things which help my team to win, but which are not rewarded with any points.
Like binding 3 enemy ships on the right wing, which helps the left wing to push through - for example.

 

The problem is: however bad I may be - there should be the same bad players on the opposite side.

As long as that is not even, this WoWS is a fun park for those who are into stats and curves and values - but none of those explain the basic problem
that thousands of players have with WoWS: why is it always THEIR team that should loose?
It can OBVIOUSLY not be the fact that I am a good or bad player. It can OBVIOUSLY only be a problem of non-balanced teams.
Cause only when the good players get into overall better teams, it would explain the momentary situation.

And that is a "crap situation". You want to force it upon every player to care about stats, ammunitions, angles etc. etc., to be accepted for the "winner teams"?
Sorry but that is the wrong way, and you will realise it when more and more players leave WoWS behind. 
I'm not asking for any better chances for me to win - all I'm asking for is an EVEN TEAM BALANCE.
Anything else is unfair crapp, sorry.

[ForlornSailor]

4 minutes ago, Wolf_Harms said:

The problem is: however bad I may be - there should be the same bad players on the opposite side.

 

As long as that is not even, this WoWS is a fun park for those who are into stats and curves and values - but none of those explain the basic problem

 

First: why should there be?

Second: thats a contradiction. Quite the opposite is true.

 

4 minutes ago, Wolf_Harms said:

that thousands of players have with WoWS: why is it always THEIR team that should loose?
It can OBVIOUSLY not be the fact wether I am good or bad. It can OBVIOUSLY only be a problem of non-balanced teams.

 

so.. players are responsible for winning but matchmaker is responsible for losing. got it.

[COPlUM]

7 minutes ago, Wolf_Harms said:

Stuff

Ok buddy, we had the exact same stats 9 months ago, I'm going to the moon, you're dropping like a rock. To any logical person that would be a very good indicator that the outcome of your battles is very much in your hands. But I'm sure "I just got super lucky with teammates 1.500 times and you got unlucky 1.500 times"

Continue to potato, not my problem, tried to help. It's the team, it's wargaming, it's rigged, whatever floats your boat (pun intended) - We'll see you 10.000 games later with a hidden profile still blaming matchmaker instead of reading guides on how to play, you guys always come back a year later with hidden stats, still driving into the cap exploding, still broadside, I don't care, don't even know why I tried.

[ForlornSailor]

11 minutes ago, Wolf_Harms said:

And that is a "crap situation". You want to force it upon every player to care about stats, ammunitions, angles etc. etc., to be accepted for the "winner teams"?
Sorry but that is the wrong way, and you will realise it when more and more players leave WoWS behind. 

 

Yea, why should I studdy openings in chess, why should I know what a queen can do and what the other figures are there for, who cares about all that. I need to win 50% of my games against Magnus Carlsen, Viswanathan Anand and Wladimir Kramnik ELSE THIS STUPID GAME CALLED CHESS IS TOTALLY UNBALANCED CRRP! CANT WAIT FOR THE DAY, WHEN PEOPLE REALIZE HOW RIGGED CHESS IS AND THE GAME FINALLY DIES!.

 

Do I have it right now?

[DFens_666]

11 minutes ago, Wolf_Harms said:

You want to force it upon every player to care about stats, ammunitions, angles etc. etc., to be accepted for the "winner teams"?

 

 

Thats not being accepted into winner teams... its becoming a better player, so that YOU can win the game.

3/10 games you lose no matter what

3/10 gams you win no matter what

4/10 games YOU decide if you win or lose.

 

But well, as the others already said, waste of time apparently...

[COPlUM]

20 minutes ago, Wolf_Harms said:

Because for every "potatoe" like me in my team, there would be a similar potatoe in the other team, if MATCHMAKING was even balanced - which it is obviously NOT.
Potatoes are divided equally, matchmaking is fair, because the average winrate of your teammates and the enemies is 50% (technically 48% but whatever)

 

I an definitely NOT getting worse - how could anyone get worse with more practise?

Yes you are, your winrate drops by 3% per tier, you get worse by repeating the same dumb things without learning game mechanics

You are totally fixated on those curves, which do not tell the whole story.

They do tell the whole story, they tell 100% of the story

I am doing many things which help my team to win

No you're not, if you did, you would win - and obviously you do not.

 

And that is a "crap situation". You want to force it upon every player to care about stats, ammunitions, angles etc. etc., to be accepted for the "winner teams"?

You want to win but can't be bothered to look up basic game mechanics? Your stats will always be red, until the day you hide them because you can't look at them anymore, and everyone will know you did it because you can't look at them anymore

I'm not going to help people in this thread anymore, you're the last person I tried. Continue blaming rigged matchmaker until you're sick and tired of the game because all you ever do is get your teeth kicked in.

[DFens_666]

16 minutes ago, Wolf_Harms said:

Anything else is unfair crapp, sorry.

 

Also

 

So most people would have lost this game, because getting 5 kills and rushing 2 DDs down to kill needs skill. A lot of people would have probably just suicided or died in a crossfire, because they dont know better.

Is that also rigged MM, because some people would have lost? And i didnt because i played smart and got the win when it was 3vs5 ships?

 

Surely that guy is one of the "winning" players, who know how everything about this game... you think, our teammates are not 40% players? Yes they are.

[Wolf_Harms]

15 hours ago, ForlornSailor said:

Do I have it right now?

 

No, you didn't even get near it. edited*
It should be OBVIOUS, that I can NOT win a round with 7 vs 7 players. I am not SUPERMAN.
 

This is NOT a game of chess - CHESS is 1 vs 1 player, you see? CHESS is like the fights 1 vs 1.
And I was doing mostly fine there. But the battles are a confrontation of two teams with 7 players each.
There are excellent players like you guys may be, and others, who didn't even know about the whole complexity of angles, overmatches etc. etc.

 

Do you really want to force all players to learn everything about CHESS? Very many people don't give a damn about chess.
They come into this wonderfully built WORLD OF WARSHIPS to spend a battling evening with others - but not necessarily to become an expert on shelling and ammunition detalis.

I am NOT complaining about the fact, that I may always die too early , or that I do not get enough points.
It only makes me wonder, why the whole rest of my team should be as bad too.
And here I can only assume: it is because you put the potatoes into one team, and the aces into the other.

Which would be a biased MATCHMAKING - not an even team balance.
And that is what I still request - an even team balance.

 

But you guys obviously IGNORE the real core of my question, cause you want to force your system through.
 

I am quite certain that I have made my point clear from the beginning, and that everybody with an open eye and an OPEN MIND can read it - and understand it.

But it seems you have decided to ignore it. You must have decided to continue this way of very unequal teams.
Which I cannot understand. Does it REALLY make any ace proud, to shoot the potatoes down? edited*
A real good warrior would only be happy about his victory, if he wou,d have beaten an EQUALLY STRONG opponent.
Anything else is nothing to be proud of, sorry. Nothing.

 

*edit: Please be nice to each other! 
 

 

 

[COPlUM]

As I finished replying - I just finished ranking out for gold, 17 wins and 1 loss in one evening. Despite encountering horrible players on both teams. I'm doing this after having stats even worse than yours for years. Because I didn't blame matchmaking, hackers, the sky or baby jesus, I blamed myself and fixed my mess.

 

Spoiler

Took me 50 games to go from bronze to gold, I'm seeing people here with 1.200+ games and they're still in bronze. Are you really suggesting those people got unlucky 1200 times and I got lucky 50 times? If so, why did I stop being unlucky 9 months ago -coincidentally around the time when I read a bunch of in depth guides on how to play this game properly-?

Could it be, perhaps, that improving your play does in fact increase your teams chance of winning

[Wolf_Harms]

 

What I see is: the TEAMS I am in loose 7 from 10 fights.
And you are SERIOUSLY trying to tell me, that this is only so, because I AM PLAYING BAD?
Me, personally, I am loosing all those battles for my whole team?

 

Sorry, but I don't know what to say to that...

[COPlUM]

2 minutes ago, Wolf_Harms said:

A real good warrior would only be happy about his victory, if he wou,d have beaten an EQUALLY STRONG opponent.

Anything else is nothing to be proud of, sorry. Nothing.

Why can't you do math? THE AVERAGE WINRATE IS 50% SO ON AVERAGE YOUR TEAMMATES WILL BE 50% AND YOUR ENEMIES WILL BE 50%

The reason forlorn, Dfens and to a lesser extent myself beat you is because just like you, we take the easy win if we are on the better team, but unlike you, we learned game mechanics that let us grab a few wins (not all, but a few) even if we are on the 40% team

 

Gitting gud means you can snatch a few wins even if you are on the weaker team. God this is like talking to a five year old. How hard is this? The average winrate is 50% therefor if you play thousands of games, the average winrate of every player you meet (in your team and on the enemy team) is 50%, therefor the only differentiating factor is you.

 

Matchmaker is fair, you're shlt, stop being shlt if you want to win more games.

[Wolf_Harms]

Just now, NikolayKuznetsov said:

...but unlike you, we learned game mechanics that let us grab a few wins (not all, but a few) even if we are on the 40% team

 

OK - then ONE LAST QUESTION: why the hell are the guys like you never in my TEAM ? .... 

[COPlUM]

2 minutes ago, Wolf_Harms said:

And you are SERIOUSLY trying to tell me, that this is only so, because I AM PLAYING BAD?

Me, personally, I am loosing all those battles for my whole team?

YES that is what we are saying because -I will try one more time- The average winrate in this videogame is 50%, on average every player you meet, in your team and the enemy team will be 50%. Your base-line winrate is 50%, if you do poorly, you go under that, if you do well, you go over that, it's this simple.