Matchmaker Discussion Thread & MM Balance

[Camperdown]

On 7/14/2021 at 6:23 AM, SV_Kompresor said:

Seriously. Why do people think that high wr players don't get bad teams? We get them just as often as everybody else. It's just that in that one out of every ten matches we manage to carry the team despite its efforts to throw the game. When will you get it through your head that those high wr player were the reason for the win and not the other way around?

Maybe there is a correlation between two types of miscomprehension? 

[Deckeru_Maiku]

On 7/15/2021 at 6:44 PM, Adm_Andre said:

Brilliant idea by the way to have now 1-Player-Co-op-Battles ... at prime time ...

 

 

Do you mean a one human vs one bot CoOp (which would be fantastic... once in a while..) or the not that rare one human and 8 bots vs 9 bots (which needs a totally different skillset than the usual CoOp battles, as one has to wait 'til the bots get their lack of ability sorted out, to then mop up the leftovers...)?

[Bear__Necessities]

Bottom tier in all but 1 Farragut game. Don't tell me its suddenly impossible to not do well. I'll take a 57% WR today with the state of some of the teams I had, the power creep, and gimmick killing currently going on in this game. 

 

[DenmarkRadar]

Dear Wargaming,
you should focus on improving the Match-Maker for Randoms.
1. Never ever, not under any circumstance, more than 1 CV per side.

- Because more than 1 CV per side ruins the game for Destroyers and Cruisers.
2. Matching skills of Cruisers:
- Same number of Radars per side.
- Same number of smoke-cruisers per side.
... you get the idea
3. Matching types of Cruisers:
- Separate Cruisers into the following sub-categories: Battle, Heavy, Light, and Ultra-Light.
- Now each side should receive a matching set of Battle, Heavy, Light, and Ultra-Light Cruisers.
4. You really should define a new and separate class:  Battle-Cruisers (BC). In stead of showing BCs in among the BBs or Cruisers.
5. Matching types of Destroyers:
- Separate Destroyers  into Leaders, Gun-Boat, All-Purpose/Mixed, and Torpedo.
- Now each side should receive a matching set of Leaders, Gun-Boat, All-Purpose/Mixed, and Torpedo Destroyers.
6. Skill/Stats-based: You should align the 2 sides to have roughly the same skill/stats-level of players.
7. Max +/-1 tier at Peak times and only +/- 2 tiers at low-population-times.

- This should be visible to the player before entering the battle-queue.
8. A CV should never see ships more than 1 tier above or below the CV's tier. So a T8 CV should play against tiers 7-9, while a T6 CV should only see combat against tiers 5-7.
- This reduces the amount that the other player feel disempowered by the tier-difference to the CV and even the amount the CV feel disempowered against the higher-tier opponents.

[Sea_w0lf]

7 hours ago, DenmarkRadar said:

 

- Because more than 1 CV per side ruins the game for Destroyers and Cruisers.
 

 

Brainless people ruin the game, not CV not + -1 etc etc.. 

I have won against +2 tier game and I have lose when Im in toptier against -1 or -2 tiers.

 

People will continue making tourist voyages, yolo, not support at all  the team. 

You are in random mode and unfortunately WG cannot improve the mentality of the players..

[159Hunter]

9 hours ago, DenmarkRadar said:

3. Matching types of Cruisers:
- Separate Cruisers into the following sub-categories: Battle, Heavy, Light, and Ultra-Light.

That's some weird sub-categories, care to give a few examples of each category plz?

Quote

5. Matching types of Destroyers:
- Separate Destroyers  into Leaders, Gun-Boat, All-Purpose/Mixed, and Torpedo.

Same question as before.

Quote

6. Skill/Stats-based: You should align the 2 sides to have roughly the same skill/stats-level of players.

There have been numerous discussions on this: 

- why should good players be punished with bad teammates?

- you will pull all players towards 50% WR, thus rendering the stats useless (and as such also the SBMM system )

Quote

7. Max +/-1 tier at Peak times and only +/- 2 tiers at low-population-times.

- This should be visible to the player before entering the battle-queue.

More tiers = more variation = more of a challenge = more XP when low tier = faster grinding

Quote

8. A CV should never see ships more than 1 tier above or below the CV's tier. So a T8 CV should play against tiers 7-9, while a T6 CV should only see combat against tiers 5-7.
- This reduces the amount that the other player feel disempowered by the tier-difference to the CV and even the amount the CV feel disempowered against the higher-tier opponents.

Yeah nope, then you just anchor your CV with 2 div m8s in a +1 tier ship and they are guaranteed top tier.

 

2 hours ago, Sea_w0lf said:

Brainless people ruin the game, not CV not + -1 etc etc.. 

True, brainless people do that. But so do CVs imo

 

[Bear__Necessities]

13 hours ago, DenmarkRadar said:

2. Matching skills of Cruisers:
- Same number of Radars per side.
- Same number of smoke-cruisers per side.
... you get the idea

Some cruisers offer a play a variety of options including none radar or radar. So? How do you proposes to even try and implement that? (You can't)

 

13 hours ago, DenmarkRadar said:

3. Matching types of Cruisers:
- Separate Cruisers into the following sub-categories: Battle, Heavy, Light, and Ultra-Light.
- Now each side should receive a matching set of Battle, Heavy, Light, and Ultra-Light Cruisers.

And what does that achieve? A Mino is perfectly capable of taking down a Moskva and vice-versa. 

 

13 hours ago, DenmarkRadar said:

5. Matching types of Destroyers:
- Separate Destroyers  into Leaders, Gun-Boat, All-Purpose/Mixed, and Torpedo.
- Now each side should receive a matching set of Leaders, Gun-Boat, All-Purpose/Mixed, and Torpedo Destroyers.

Why? Actually does nothing. Unless you want games of 5 shimas matched against 5 shimas. A variety of DD's in game is what counters other DD's. This idea is just bad and would make the game even more stale. 

 

13 hours ago, DenmarkRadar said:

6. Skill/Stats-based: You should align the 2 sides to have roughly the same skill/stats-level of players.

Does not work in a game like this. All you do is punish good players. Reward bad players. Get everyone to 50% and then what? You have an algorithm that can't separate anyone (anyone who would be left anyway) 

 

13 hours ago, DenmarkRadar said:

7. Max +/-1 tier at Peak times and only +/- 2 tiers at low-population-times.

- This should be visible to the player before entering the battle-queue.

Why? You get rewarded for being lower tier in a higher MM and helps grinds go faster. It also just dumbs down the game and takes away any meaningful challenge. 

 

13 hours ago, DenmarkRadar said:

8. A CV should never see ships more than 1 tier above or below the CV's tier. So a T8 CV should play against tiers 7-9, while a T6 CV should only see combat against tiers 5-7.
- This reduces the amount that the other player feel disempowered by the tier-difference to the CV and even the amount the CV feel disempowered against the higher-tier opponents.

You want more 899's??? Coz that'll be rife and super fun for all the T7's......

 

In short to nearly every point. No. I don't want my fun taken away to make it easy for players not willing to adapt and learn like I had to. 

 

[WorthyOpponent]

I didn't want to start a new thread because it seemed like it is related to MM

 

May I ask how is this possible?

I triple checked and it says the division spread can't be more than 1 tier. 

Did the rule change or something or is the client drunk again? Am I blind? What is going on? 

 

 

[Camperdown]

15 minutes ago, WorthyOpponent said:

I didn't want to start a new thread because it seemed like it is related to MM

 

May I ask how is this possible?

I triple checked and it says the division spread can't be more than 1 tier. 

Did the rule change or something or is the client drunk again? Am I blind? What is going on? 

 

 

My guess is they made the division in the game, e.g. one of them invited the other into the div during the battle or during waiting time before the battle.

[LANS0N]

When topclans plays togheter, should atleast find some better than us on the opposing team?

 

[159Hunter]

2 hours ago, LANS0N said:

When topclans plays togheter, should atleast find some better than us on the opposing team?

How?

[lameoll]

On 7/31/2021 at 10:22 AM, WorthyOpponent said:

Did the rule change or something or is the client drunk again? Am I blind? What is going on? 

what u highlighted means that if divisioning you cant pick a T6 ship when the other picks a T8 ship  you an only go +1   or -1 from each other

 

it does not mean you wont get +2 MM 

[WorthyOpponent]

1 hour ago, lameoll said:

what u highlighted means that if divisioning you cant pick a T6 ship when the other picks a T8 ship  you an only go +1   or -1 from each other

 

it does not mean you wont get +2 MM 

can't you see the T8 and T10 are in the same division or should I highlight that specially for you?

 

 

The explanation above was the most sensical one, but I'm pretty sure they were in a div when I got to the lobby, so they were super fast I guess

[lameoll]

55 minutes ago, WorthyOpponent said:

can't you see the T8 and T10 are in the same division or should I highlight that specially for you?

AH yes your right

 

might need my eyes checked again :P 

[Fatal_Ramses]

As the salty artist said: "This is animal research!"

There are no good or fun tier X games, always a landslide one way or the other.

[Aethervoxx]

What 'balance'? There is very little. I saw one of the worst 5-6 gaming sessions today I've ever seen. Totally unbalanced MM & RNG.

When I see this amount of an utter garbage playing session - there's just a few options left besides outright uninstalling the game.

 1) I will never give WoWS (WG) another penny.

2) I will never recommend WoWS (or any other WG product) to potential new players. I value RL friends & acquaintances more than a leach gaming company.

3) I will just play much less because who wants to experience an almost continually bad gaming experience? 

Personally, I'm at the point where I would like to see WG go bankrupt.

 

[ColonelPete]

17 minutes ago, Aethervoxx said:

3) I will just play much less because who wants to experience an almost continually bad gaming experience?

Obviously you, since you still play

[Aethervoxx]

5 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

since you still play

Sure I do & fyi, Pete, I will continue to do so since there's always a chance I will see you in randoms again & on the other team.

 

[ColonelPete]

4 minutes ago, Aethervoxx said:

Sure I do & fyi, Pete, I will continue to do so since there's always a chance I will see you in randoms again & on the other team.

I am glad that I am your sole motivation to play this game

[159Hunter]

39 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

I am glad that I am your sole motivation to play this game

Don't forgot to visit the forums as well when banned 

[Bear__Necessities]

On 8/6/2021 at 9:00 PM, Fatal_Ramses said:

There are no good or fun tier X games, always a landslide one way or the other.

For only you maybe. Though I will say the fun levels for me ARE dropping a bit. But I'm still getting close tight games at T10. 

[Quazie]

Graphs, Data tables and total BS.

 

Data can be manipulated and I suspect it is. Play the damn game and you can see the MM need a COMPLETE overhaul.

+/-2 is a problem today with such OP ships being released, and it doesn't end there I have seen people in T8 and T7 division dragged into T10, what chance doe s a T7 have .. None.

The fact is the whole game is out of balance with all the power creep, you are never going to balance the MM with all the other problems you have created.

 

Someone said Radar isn't a problem, wrong!

When there are 4 destroyers on each side and one team has 3 radar boats (12km) and the other team has none or 1 what do you called that if it is not a problem?

Can you guess which team has enough advantage from the 1st second of the game, I know it's a hard one to answer if your a developer, but not if your a player.

 

It is so bad today that you can often look at a ship line up when the game opens an know if your screwed from the outset, there should always be a reasonable chance and sadly today there often isn't.

 

Part of the problem in all your development, MM or other areas always comes down to two things.

 

1) You overlook the fact that this is a TEAM game, the mix of good and bad players affects the outcome (more on that later), especially when there are OP ships around. If the balance was right when you enter a game both teams should have a fair chance of winning and yet most times they do not because of the MM and the way it works.

 

2) As developers you want your pay check and when the boss wants say subs you put them in regardless of what players say, you base all of your work and balancing of of flawed statistics. I say they are flawed for numerous reasons and until you understand that a deal with the issues they will remain seriously flawed. You are driven to make the game into a cash cow and drive everything from the bottom line. They problem with this is that when you alienate the players they leave, you will achieve a point where they leave faster than they join.

 

Why do you think the player base is not growing enough?

 

Back to the MM

 

1) There is no skill balance player to player, not that it matters because under the current WR% it means nothing, that is seriously flawed as well.

2) Putting a bias in to deal with the T8 problem has just shifted it to T7 as I said it would.

3) An imbalance of Radar of more than 1 causes problems in games with lots of destroyers.

4) An imbalance of detectability can cause problems, if one side is all low, and the other side is all high it can be a problem.

5) An imbalance of ships with a high chance of fire, cruisers and especially battleships like Thunder and Conqueror, and when you set chance of fire you don't take into account the number of shells per minute that can be fired which is affected by the number of barrels as well. A ship may only have 14% chance of fire but when it can pump out several shells every 3 or 4 seconds .. work it out yourself.

6) An imbalance of the new SAP from one team to the other can cause problems.

 

The list is far longer than that, these are a few things you never account for in matchmaking, and not many of them would matter if the game wasn't so far out of balance.

The problem has always been your approach, if you buff chance of fire instead of admitting it didn't work as planned, you try and fix it by changing something else, you do this with pretty much everything and just introduce more problems instead of fixing the one you created.

[ColonelPete]

3 hours ago, Quazie said:

Graphs, Data tables and total BS.

 

Data can be manipulated and I suspect it is. Play the damn game and you can see the MM need a COMPLETE overhaul.

Riiight. Believing all the people who claim that they lose 90% of their matches for months or that they are always™ uptiered is much more reliable...

No surprise that none of these claims withstood a superficial check. Personal opinions are biased. Data can be easily validated.

 

3 hours ago, Quazie said:

+/-2 is a problem today with such OP ships being released, and it doesn't end there I have seen people in T8 and T7 division dragged into T10, what chance doe s a T7 have .. None.

The fact is the whole game is out of balance with all the power creep, you are never going to balance the MM with all the other problems you have created.

When you consider everything OP that sinks you, then yes, we have some OP ships. RM BB, KM DD and Dutch CA are clear proof against powercreep.

And when you enter a Tier VIII division with a Tier VII ship, you have to live with the consequences.

 

3 hours ago, Quazie said:

Someone said Radar isn't a problem, wrong!

When there are 4 destroyers on each side and one team has 3 radar boats (12km) and the other team has none or 1 what do you called that if it is not a problem?

Can you guess which team has enough advantage from the 1st second of the game, I know it's a hard one to answer if your a developer, but not if your a player.

 

It is so bad today that you can often look at a ship line up when the game opens an know if your screwed from the outset, there should always be a reasonable chance and sadly today there often isn't.

 

Part of the problem in all your development, MM or other areas always comes down to two things.

 

1) You overlook the fact that this is a TEAM game, the mix of good and bad players affects the outcome (more on that later), especially when there are OP ships around. If the balance was right when you enter a game both teams should have a fair chance of winning and yet most times they do not because of the MM and the way it works.

 

It helps when you note the radar ships in the lineup and act accordingly. They cannot cover the whole map.

And no, ship lineups do not decide battles, players do.

When your radar cruiser uses radar 10s after the battle starts and does not have it ready, when the enemy DD smokes up in the cap, and instead tries to rush the smoke and gets taken apart in a few seconds, then your radar cruiser did not really help you...

 

Great! Reward bad players by giving them more skilled teammmates. That will encourage players to get better or turn off their TV while playing... Just play braindead, the MM will give you the right team to succeed anyway.

 

3 hours ago, Quazie said:

Back to the MM

 

1) There is no skill balance player to player, not that it matters because under the current WR% it means nothing, that is seriously flawed as well.

2) Putting a bias in to deal with the T8 problem has just shifted it to T7 as I said it would.

3) An imbalance of Radar of more than 1 causes problems in games with lots of destroyers.

4) An imbalance of detectability can cause problems, if one side is all low, and the other side is all high it can be a problem.

5) An imbalance of ships with a high chance of fire, cruisers and especially battleships like Thunder and Conqueror, and when you set chance of fire you don't take into account the number of shells per minute that can be fired which is affected by the number of barrels as well. A ship may only have 14% chance of fire but when it can pump out several shells every 3 or 4 seconds .. work it out yourself.

6) An imbalance of the new SAP from one team to the other can cause problems.

1. Then do not complain about teams with 4x% winrate players vs 6x% players
2. I do not see a problem on Tier VII
3. Not really
4. Then play your ships accordingly
5. see 4, learn how to deal with fire
6. SAP is not really a problem

How long do you want to wait if the MM had to consider all these factors? 15+ minutes?

[Quazie]

16 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

Riiight. Believing all the people who claim that they lose 90% of their matches for months or that they are always™ uptiered is much more reliable...

No surprise that none of these claims withstood a superficial check. Personal opinions are biased. Data can be easily validated.

I worked with data for years and I can assure you it is easily manipulated to show want you want it to. Nobody said anything about believing players, YOU injected that.

Data is collected from a game with a flawed MM, flawed mechanics, ergo the data must by definition be flawed to say otherwise would be mental.

The only valid question is how flawed, not that it is.

[ColonelPete]

2 hours ago, Quazie said:

I worked with data for years and I can assure you it is easily manipulated to show want you want it to. Nobody said anything about believing players, YOU injected that.

Data is collected from a game with a flawed MM, flawed mechanics, ergo the data must by definition be flawed to say otherwise would be mental.

The only valid question is how flawed, not that it is.

You are a player.

And I can assure you that my personal results mirror the official data.

 

Data is only flawed when the data gathering is flawed. You can get highly accurate data from a faulty engine and the data will show the problem.