Matchmaker Discussion Thread & MM Balance

[DFens_666]

48 minutes ago, NikolayKuznetsov said:



 

 

Its kinda interesting to see, that out of 12 players only one is invested in the game, while the other 11 might aswell just quit the game in the near future. I cant quite understand where the hordes of <100 game players are coming from, but you can see them all the time...

[Chips_uk]

15 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Its kinda interesting to see, that out of 12 players only one is invested in the game, while the other 11 might aswell just quit the game in the near future. I cant quite understand where the hordes of <100 game players are coming from, but you can see them all the time...

You do realise it's a game right? Only one invested because he's played 11k games, the rest might as well uninstall? Why, because you think they're not good enough to deserve to play a game.

 

It's a F2P game. If you can't understand where the "hordes" of < 100 game players are coming from, then that's your issue - not theirs or the game. The F2P model is working as intended. WG will know what the %age conversion of F2P to Paying customer is. Just like Twitch will know what their percentage of free to paying viewer is (i.e. ones who pay for subs vs ones who will never pay a sub). Pure numbers. 

 

[DFens_666]

16 minutes ago, Chips_uk said:

the rest might as well uninstall? Why, because you think they're not good enough to deserve to play a game.

 

No, becuase most of them have <1k battles, and none has >2k... They might aswell just quit the game tomorrow, because it wasnt fun for them (seeing the numbers, i wouldnt even wonder about it).

And if you got back like 2-3 years, the game wasnt flooded with people who have a couple of hundred games played. WG alienated people with a genuine interest in the game, and replaced them with cash-cows.

[Chips_uk]

5 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

No, becuase most of them have <1k battles, and none has >2k... They might aswell just quit the game tomorrow, because it wasnt fun for them (seeing the numbers, i wouldnt even wonder about it).

So for you, winning is *the* fun. No point playing if you don't win the majority of your games (WR > 50%); there's nothing else to gain from the game than winning.

 

Is that what you're saying?

[DFens_666]

35 minutes ago, Chips_uk said:

So for you, winning is *the* fun. No point playing if you don't win the majority of your games (WR > 50%); there's nothing else to gain from the game than winning.

 

Is that what you're saying?

 

So what you are saying is, people have fun losing and performing just badly while playing a game.

Gotcha

[159Hunter]

42 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

So what you are saying is, people have fun losing and performing just badly while playing a game.

Gotcha

You know, it's like all those people that join a soccer team and are happy to lose every sunday game.

To achieve that they don't join regular training sessions, they don't learn the rules of the game, they don't learn basic game tactics.

Because participating is more important than winning you know 

[ForlornSailor]

17 hours ago, zekai7498 said:

Potatoes,everywere.There are no brain,no sign of intelligence,only basic instincts... 

 

Here is the funny thing: thanks to the law of mathematics, we should see a rise in Winrate of the potato-hords soon. Also the damage. Even if everyone is stupid, 50% of the players win and someone WILL deal the damage, right?

So the statistics will correct itself and mmm wont look as bad anymore. Gameplay itself will still be abysmal ofc, but hey - cant have everything, right?

 

2 hours ago, Chips_uk said:

So for you, winning is *the* fun. No point playing if you don't win the majority of your games (WR > 50%); there's nothing else to gain from the game than winning. 

 

Name us ONE game in the history of mankind, where the goal of playing is NOT winning. The very first game, invented by humans, the Royal Game of Ur, was two players facing each other and playing out the winner. One would call it "PvP" these days. There is no game, where people sit around for 2 hours and then just go along without any decision. And yes, in every game, winning IS fun. Its coded in human nature.

Quote

“Winning increases the dopamine receptors in the brain, which makes you smarter and more bold” – Ian H. Robertson

Quote

“As a species, we share the same biology with other animals, but express it uniquely. We can have two humans sitting at a table doing nothing more physically taxing than one of them moving a little piece of wood on the table. And if it happens that these two individuals are at a chess tournament, then they are able to keep [up] a blood pressure for six hours [at a level] that you normally only see in a marathon runner, while doing nothing more than thinking. And this is outrageous because when you look at these chess Grand Masters who’ve just taken down an opponent, they will have the exact same physiology of some wild baboon in the savannah who has just ripped open the stomach of his worst rival.”

 

Robert Sapolsky, primatologist, from Wired Magazine article

 

[COPlUM]

On 4/7/2021 at 11:10 AM, Chips_uk said:

You do realise it's a game right? Only one invested because he's played 11k games, the rest might as well uninstall? Why, because you think they're not good enough to deserve to play a game.

That's not what anyone is saying. I'll give you 2 examples :

-Guy on my team just now played almost 500 games in a blyskawica, his average XP is 355, his average damage is 3.050 - All he did, the entire game, was ram other DDs on his team into torpedoes, by accident, I could tell he wasn't doing it on purpose.
-The worst player in Europe has thousands of games in Vermont, averaging 6K damage, he's the worst player in europe with every ship he ever played, he played tens of thousands of games and he's in the German section of this forum giving advice - Since last time I checked, he played another 200 games in the ship and his average damage is now under 4K. That's landing one shell every 1,5 games - one shell. He played fifteen thousand games and his damage record is 38K in T10. His K/D is 0.00 - Meaning he has literally never killed anyone in five years of playing world of warships

What we're saying is, why on earth would anyone do this, how is this fun, to average 3K in a blyska, you need to hit one torpedo every 7 games, to average 4K in a vermont, you need to hit one shell every 2 games. What we're saying is, perhaps horrible players should take a break, learn the game, then come back to the game, they would probably enjoy it more if they did anything but just spawn - die - spawn - die - spawn - die for tens of thousands of games, for years.

There's examples of people with 60.000 games and less than 0.05K/D - Meaning they die 20 times for every ship they kill. How in gods name could these people possibly be having fun?
You're right, it is a game, it's not just about winning, but being the worst player in the entire world for tens of thousands of games can't be any fun either, it just can't be.

[Chips_uk]

21 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

 

So what you are saying is, people have fun losing and performing just badly while playing a game.

Gotcha

Nope. I asked if you considered winning the only derivation of fun in playing the game. Is it JUST winning? Everything else you try to imply/twist is straw man - though I note you've not answered the question posed, but instead deflected. Typical.

 

Quote

 

Name us ONE game in the history of mankind, where the goal of playing is NOT winning. The very first game, invented by humans, the Royal Game of Ur, was two players facing each other and playing out the winner. One would call it "PvP" these days. There is no game, where people sit around for 2 hours and then just go along without any decision. And yes, in every game, winning IS fun. Its coded in human nature.

 

 

Nice quotes you provide - but they've zero relevance to the question I've made. Worse, it's actually kinda supporting the fact you can derive enjoyment from playing a game without winning. I mean...you quote something highlighting chess and blood pressure of the players. You do realise chess is a 2 player game, and therefore, 1 person loses. Did the person losing not enjoy the game? That's kinda what I'm getting at. They can enjoy just playing the game. In that scenario the mental battle leading up to the end is very enjoyable; even if outclassed massively, being able to do your best is great. Perhaps in *this* game they really are doing their best and loving every minute of it. With a 40% win rate. Or maybe they just like reading the tears of their allies. 

 

To be doubly clear, I've not said winning isn't part of the fun. So some of these points being made are at best irrelevant.

 

Quote

What we're saying is, why on earth would anyone do this, how is this fun, to average 3K in a blyska, you need to hit one torpedo every 7 games, to average 4K in a vermont, you need to hit one shell every 2 games. What we're saying is, perhaps horrible players should take a break, learn the game, then come back to the game, they would probably enjoy it more if they did anything but just spawn - die - spawn - die - spawn - die for tens of thousands of games, for years.

 

They may well enjoy it more. 

 

The problem being exhibited is the people who rage over these people daring to enjoy playing the game despite not being deemed "good enough" by others.

I mean you can't understand how he enjoys it, but he obviously must do. Your lack of understanding isn't his concern. Clearly. 

 

Don't get my wrong, I do understand that some find it ridiculous that others aren't willing to improve or learn or other - but it's their decision/choice to make. You don't get to decide what/how/where people play/enjoy the game, as long as it's within the rules. You don't understand how they do enjoy it, but that's fine. You don't have to (you could ask that particular guy if you like though - interesting to know! :) ).

 

There's no way to know the circumstances of the players either. Didn't Jingles make a video about a blind person playing the game too where by they steer and someone else aims and shoots - easy to imagine they enjoy playing the game. 

[arttuperkunas]

How you managed to derail a thread that was never on any discernable rails to begin with I shall never know, but bravo sir/madam.

 

Keep on the good fight against the winrate elitists for the little people, and one day you will win the internet.

[Chips_uk]

6 minutes ago, arttuperkunas said:

How you managed to derail a thread that was never on any discernable rails to begin with I shall never know, but bravo sir/madam.

 

Keep on the good fight against the winrate elitists for the little people, and one day you will win the internet.

Good point, well made. No sheepish emote to use so >.<

 

Yay, back to sucky MM. 

[GarrusBrutus]

18 minutes ago, Chips_uk said:

There's no way to know the circumstances of the players either. Didn't Jingles make a video about a blind person playing the game too where by they steer and someone else aims and shoots - easy to imagine they enjoy playing the game. 

No there indeed is not, but whatever that person's circumstances are, they should ask themselves the question: Is my fun affecting everyone else's fun? 

I don't care if someone is enjoying the game in their own way, good for them. But if they start playing in a team and they actively sabotage their team for the sake of having "fun".... then they can go F right off.

 

 Handicapped, either mentally or physically, i dont know this person's circumstances. But I do know that thousands and thousands of players have had really bad experiences with this player.

[DFens_666]

24 minutes ago, Chips_uk said:

Nope. I asked if you considered winning the only derivation of fun in playing the game. Is it JUST winning? Everything else you try to imply/twist is straw man - though I note you've not answered the question posed, but instead deflected. Typical.

 

You implied that its only about WR - i actually didnt only look at WR. To me, the overall performance is much worse than the low WR. Because you can have fun when losing aswell, but then its generally an enjoyable experience for both teams/players (if we look at games/sports outside of WOws). But its like playing to get constantly shat on by everything. 

[arttuperkunas]

If people are playing this game constantly while being terrible at it, I sure hope they are having fun. There are other reasons as to why someone would clock in thousands of games without having much fun, mostly to do with how F2P games are made to be addictive.

[DFens_666]

16 minutes ago, arttuperkunas said:

There are other reasons as to why someone would clock in thousands of games without having much fun, mostly to do with how F2P games are made to be addictive.

 

Or spending thousands of € on it... so you will keep playing because you "have to"

[MimosA_A]

54 minutes ago, Chips_uk said:

 

The problem being exhibited is the people who rage over these people daring to enjoy playing the game despite not being deemed "good enough" by others.

I mean you can't understand how he enjoys it, but he obviously must do. Your lack of understanding isn't his concern. Clearly. 

  

Don't get my wrong, I do understand that some find it ridiculous that others aren't willing to improve or learn or other - but it's their decision/choice to make. You don't get to decide what/how/where people play/enjoy the game, as long as it's within the rules. You don't understand how they do enjoy it, but that's fine. You don't have to (you could ask that particular guy if you like though - interesting to know! :) ).

 

There's no way to know the circumstances of the players either. Didn't Jingles make a video about a blind person playing the game too where by they steer and someone else aims and shoots - easy to imagine they enjoy playing the game.  

The moment you press battle in what at the end of the day is a team game you kind of owe it to the people that end up in  the team to at least try to have a reasonably positive impact. If all you want to do is enjoy the scenery and the sounds of your torp tubes and guns going off, co-op is a better place for that.

 

Not everyone has to be good, and everyone (except for a few exception) plays for fun, but there's a point where the extent to which you are detrimental to the experience of your teammates goes too far.

 

And that blind person did a lot better than people who have no excuse for being as terrible as they are.

[COPlUM]

1 hour ago, Chips_uk said:

Don't get my wrong, I do understand that some find it ridiculous that others aren't willing to improve or learn or other - but it's their decision/choice to make. You don't get to decide what/how/where people play/enjoy the game, as long as it's within the rules. You don't understand how they do enjoy it, but that's fine. You don't have to (you could ask that particular guy if you like though - interesting to know! :)

This is one person, you honestly believe he's having fun? I had this guy on my ranked team in bronze, didn't sound like he was having fun, he was playing DD, speedboost into 3 radar cruisers, dead in the 70th second of the game, he spent the next 15 minutes blaming the team in all caps and shouting in German

 

 

If you play two thousand games in two months, die two thousand times and kill one enemy ship, you need to stop playing and learn the game before you can have fun.

[JohnMac79]

Why am i seeing this again lately?

 

 

What is the meaning of this? Why is MM not mirroring ship types, is this some kind of test?

[DFens_666]

10 minutes ago, JohnMac79 said:

What is the meaning of this? Why is MM not mirroring ship types, is this some kind of test?

 

Faildiv?

[JohnMac79]

13 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Faildiv?

You are right, i just checked the original screenshot again and yes, there was a fail div with a Shchors and an Edinburgh on my team. I really wish WG would pull their finger out of their aholes and prohibit these idiot divisions. So i end up with a Shchors in a T10 game and one DD less... Of course it was a stomp, who would ever imagine that...

[159Hunter]

5 hours ago, NikolayKuznetsov said:

This is one person, you honestly believe he's having fun? I had this guy on my ranked team in bronze, didn't sound like he was having fun, he was playing DD, speedboost into 3 radar cruisers, dead in the 70th second of the game, he spent the next 15 minutes blaming the team in all caps and shouting in German

 

 

If you play two thousand games in two months, die two thousand times and kill one enemy ship, you need to stop playing and learn the game before you can have fun.

This is just...

Speechless....

[RamboCras]

On 4/5/2021 at 11:27 PM, arttuperkunas said:

Do they ever actually change their behaviour, or is the warning more for your own peace of mind/morality of "abandoning" them there? As so far it seems to me that if your team ticks 1, or all three of those boxes, then they are usually big enough potatoes that they don't play differently no matter what you write in chat.

Neh, but I don't want to play on a flank where people can't team play. And without me spotting torping, they are fucked. Funny part is that are such morons they usually don't even understand the effect of playing a flank without a dd when the other side has one.

 

[RamboCras]

I have this plugin where I can see all the stats of all the players in the game. Today I had 6 games in a row where my team had like 6-9(!) players with >50% win rate while the enemy team had 3-4. Does the matchmaking only look at ships? I hope that it is more intelligent than that? Then again... either I was really unlucky 6 times in a row (chance is 1/2^6 = 1,5%) or it doesn't look at players.

 

Could be doable to try to get the same total winrate (for the ships), battles played in that ship and also battles played total almost equal on the same side?

[Leo_Apollo11]

Hi all,

 

On 4/7/2021 at 10:06 AM, NikolayKuznetsov said:

I didn't know it was 80%, is it really? But I've seen this too, you see suprisingly few people with average stats. Random teams are mostly a sea of red, sometimes with one or two unicums. Whichever potato team has one or two unicums wins. Like I got this as my first enemy team today, they lost 12 ships vs our 0 losses before the first 5 minutes were up. I had to speedboost yolo into something to get some damage done before the game was over.

 

One of these guys was in a north carolina and didn't know how DCP works, he didn't use it, it's not that he blew it on one fire and then got fires stacked on his ship, he just never used it. I got 4 fires ticking on him and he never used it, he just kept sailing in a straight line with 4 fires on his ship and didn't put it out. Why are people with 60 games in T8, they installed the game yesterday.

 

This is even fine... you have 3 ships with WinRate above 50%...

 

In my several of my latest Ranked games I was the one and only in 7 vs. 7 in my team with above 50% overall WinRate... everything RED and barely 40%... 

 

 

Leo "Apollo11"

[xe_N_on]

Am 7.4.2021 um 16:35, Chips_uk sagte:

So for you, winning is *the* fun. No point playing if you don't win the majority of your games (WR > 50%); there's nothing else to gain from the game than winning.

 

Is that what you're saying?

 

Aside from games, image a hobby musician, e.g. a violinist or a pianist. Becoming better at playing an instrument mean hard and boring training lessons (I play piano, btw.). However, this musician is not interested in becoming better, because he/she have fun simply playing the instrument without any skill creating some sort of "noise". This is fine, as long as the musician play alone.

 

But imagine this musician part of a hobby orchestra. While all other musicians in the orchestra train hard to play a piece together, this particular musician does not and simply disrupt the play of his fellow musician. One musician has fun. All other have not. How long do you think other musicians would tolerate such a person?

 

In WoWs you unfortunately have no choice.

 

In a competitive pvp team game you should bring your self in to win. If you can't, you should have enough empathy for other player to stay at solo or at least PvE. This don't mean, you need to be a unicum ... but you should give your best.