Matchmaker Discussion Thread & MM Balance

[deathsadow]

On 9/21/2021 at 5:41 PM, ColonelPete said:

 

Not much difference in %-points...

 

 

Well it depends on where the % diffi comes from.

 

3% diff over the team can be balanced , but lets say all 5 of your BBs have 2% better WR than enemy BBs , but on the only DD your team has you have a 25%% WR dif in favour of the enemy DD, rest of the team are are equal. I bet due to that single gap you will lose the game pretty hard. Or to go to even wilder scenario imagine the same with a 40% stock Audacious on your team , while enemy has a 65% WR fully equiped MVR with Lutjens.

 

Also having 3x random dude with 55% doesnt balance vs a 3man 55% players divisioned up, having Discord up.

 

The MM cant be ballanced as there are too many variables( divisions, ship types, stock vs full build), and too few players to mix and match around. What WG should do is maybe decrease the penalty on the exp when you lose , generally i dont care to lose unless i need the exp for farming mission/ ship & thats where the most fustration comes for the playerbase ( bet you all know the feeling of running dragon flags & your team throws the game even if you did well).

[ColonelPete]

9 minutes ago, deathsadow said:

Well it depends on where the % diffi comes from.

 

3% diff over the team can be balanced , but lets say all 5 of your BBs have 2% better WR than enemy BBs , but on the only DD your team has you have a 25%% WR dif in favour of the enemy DD, rest of the team are are equal. I bet due to that single gap you will lose the game pretty hard. Or to go to even wilder scenario imagine the same with a 40% stock Audacious on your team , while enemy has a 65% WR fully equiped MVR with Lutjens.

 

Also having 3x random dude with 55% doesnt balance vs a 3man 55% players divisioned up, having Discord up.

 

The MM cant be ballanced as there are too many variables( divisions, ship types, stock vs full build), and too few players to mix and match around. What WG should do is maybe decrease the penalty on the exp when you lose , generally i dont care to lose unless i need the exp for farming mission/ ship & thats where the most fustration comes for the playerbase ( bet you all know the feeling of running dragon flags & your team throws the game even if you did well).

A 25%-point difference is a pretty rare thing. But a good player getting compensated by a lot of bad players has a harder time carrying the team than when both teams have more average players, that know what they are doing.

 

Btw. losing has not XP penalty. Winning has an XP Bonus. And yes, that is one of the few things that might motivate players to play for the win. When you reduce that advantage, the win becomes less important and you will see even more farming.

[deathsadow]

39 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

A 25%-point difference is a pretty rare thing. But a good player getting compensated by a lot of bad players has a harder time carrying the team than when both teams have more average players, that know what they are doing.

 

Btw. losing has not XP penalty. Winning has an XP Bonus. And yes, that is one of the few things that might motivate players to play for the win. When you reduce that advantage, the win becomes less important and you will see even more farming.

Well yeah, that can be true, but at the current state of the game the events itself make pretty much everyone farm all the time, just look at the high tier games , mostly they are just HE spam from the back.

 

As for how hard it is to carry if you have a huge skill gap between you and your opponent really depends on the ship class... just remember how the old CVs with a great player , vs a avg Joe ended up ... and the same is true even nowdays for CVs and DDs. As for a truly great BB player .... yeah you have way way harder time to carry.

 

In my opinion the MM is mostly fine, the divisions can really break it, but that is another topic( divi/solo queue would be nice to see), the games get so one sided because WG just make a few ships as key to victory via the spotting system ( if your CV and DD is potato level, well prepare to lose without much chance to fight back), but that is like one of the base mechanics of the game, which you can impact only if you play a ship with radar or with great ability to spot stuff while not getting yourself spotted.

[ColonelPete]

20 minutes ago, deathsadow said:

Well yeah, that can be true, but at the current state of the game the events itself make pretty much everyone farm all the time, just look at the high tier games , mostly they are just HE spam from the back.

If that were the case, we would not see that many sunk ships in the first minutes...

If the farming increased, the situation would get worse. Rewarding a defeat better does not improve the game.

[Aethervoxx]

Today, I play random battles to simply complete my contribution to Naval Battles for my clan.

What do I see? Twelve stinking losses to just four wins.

 It's not like I play badly. I try as best I can as a 48%er. There's always other worse players on my team. Odd how 'that' works, isn't it?

 What utter garbage WG MM cheating.

The results should be close to 50% win/loss instead of a STINKING 25% - that's a TOTAL BULLCRAP CHEAT!

This is not a random MM. This is a WG MM CHEAT!

[Sea_w0lf]

21 minutes ago, Aethervoxx said:

Today, I play random battles...

 

You chose bad day to play random battles.... Its potato weekend!! 

[ColonelPete]

On 9/25/2021 at 9:02 PM, Aethervoxx said:

post removed

When you consider an explanation as contrarian behaviour, maybe you should look up the word first...

On 9/25/2021 at 9:09 PM, Aethervoxx said:

...There's always other worse players on my team. Odd how 'that' works, isn't it?

If that were different, you would have to worry about your own results...

 

I am pretty sure that I have worse players than me on my team in 99.99%+ of my battles...

[Pukovnik7]

Problem isn't win/loss rate, problem is that so many games are flat-out stomps. A game where enemy team collapses may not be as frustrating as one where my own team does, but it is just as unsatisfying.

 

Second problem is that so many matches are, thanks in part to said collapse, resolved way outside the brawling range.

[mariouus]

On 9/21/2021 at 12:11 AM, Bear__Necessities said:

That IS the definition of random. Well done. You're learning. 

Because we are talking about WarGambling.Just going do point out couple of things.

 

MM is pseudorandom. So the Randomness is essentially scripted in. MM can have few rules - but it can also have alot of rules ( it can infact have many rules to change it, based by players in queue). And it will still appear "Random".

Fact is, many Gambling places actually use mechanism that Changes Win chances - in order do change person impressions. Could WG be doing that? There are benefits.

 

Actually, if you think about it - WG can actually change alot of thing. Not only in MM, but also ship stats on the fly. In essence - WoWs and WoT is a Gambling runner dream. There are alot of tools that are (atleast theoretically) present do really  influence players, or changing their impression.

 

Are they doing it - I dont know. Are they not doing it - again do not know. But they definitely can do that.

[ColonelPete]

2 hours ago, mariouus said:

There are benefits.

What benefits?

[Pukovnik7]

4 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

What benefits?

Giving players a winning streak and then shifting to a losing streak so as to influence them to buy premiums, for example.

[ColonelPete]

7 minutes ago, Pukovnik7 said:

Giving players a winning streak and then shifting to a losing streak so as to influence them to buy premiums, for example.

How does a losing streak make me buy premium?

How are losing streaks possible when WG gifts everyone premium?

Why do some players without premium have less losing streaks than some players with premium?

[mariouus]

1 hour ago, ColonelPete said:

What benefits?

Slightly changing things to somewhat change gameplay experience  to "guide" person towards your goals

 

One example. Someguys Premium expired and did not buy a new one. Psychologically right after that Premium time expires is best time do influence the player do spend money and buy a new one. Lets say slightly before the Premium expires, they slightly increase (improve) ships stats (and MM) - not mutch only to but it in the "'upper bracket" of RNG. And when the Premium does expire and it is not extended, they slightly reduce ship stats - just do but it in the "lower bracket" of the RNG. Statiistically speaking nothing changes - it is all in "Random" probability. Many people does not even notice that something changed, some do not care. But some will and some will buy Premium for that. 

 

Second example. They Release a new Ship. More tailored for some more competetive mode - lets say Ranked. How do you increase popularity and make people buy it. Specially that there are allready quite a few that fit the meta. You again give the new ships stats that are "upper RNG bracket" and "old ships" stats that are in "lower bracked". People will notice it and will make self adverstisement for other people.

 

It is actually possible do change most of the stats - like dispersion, fire chance, certain manouvrability stats - with-out anybody being able do prove that it is not "Regular" RNG. Same with MM, I would personally make Automated system where all Players are divided in a certain always changing categorys - so it would be easier do "doctor" their gameplay experience. Even heavily controlled MM will still appare RNG, due that fact that something are still Random in it.

 

Again - not saying they are doing it. I am saying they can do it. It would be extremly easy infact. Basically every game with all Server side calculations can do it. And I am not talking about large changes either.

 

[ColonelPete]

1 hour ago, mariouus said:

One example. Someguys Premium expired and did not buy a new one. Psychologically right after that Premium time expires is best time do influence the player do spend money and buy a new one. Lets say slightly before the Premium expires, they slightly increase (improve) ships stats (and MM) - not mutch only to but it in the "'upper bracket" of RNG. And when the Premium does expire and it is not extended, they slightly reduce ship stats - just do but it in the "lower bracket" of the RNG. Statiistically speaking nothing changes - it is all in "Random" probability. Many people does not even notice that something changed, some do not care. But some will and some will buy Premium for that.

And how does that make me buy premium time when one experiences streaks with and without premium time?

https://proships.ru/stat/eu/p/529243319-ColonelPete/all/

 

I have premium time for the whole year, still July happened. When my premium time runs out, why should a bad streak motivate me to buy premium time again if that is the same thing that happens with premium time?

 

1 hour ago, mariouus said:

Second example. They Release a new Ship. More tailored for some more competetive mode - lets say Ranked. How do you increase popularity and make people buy it. Specially that there are allready quite a few that fit the meta. You again give the new ships stats that are "upper RNG bracket" and "old ships" stats that are in "lower bracked". People will notice it and will make self adverstisement for other people.

That is called making ships too strong. There is no need for RNG manipulation. I know of NO ship that overpeformed despite being weak. And I know of NO old strong ship that suddenly performed weak.

[mariouus]

58 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

And how does that make me buy premium time when one experiences streaks with and without premium time?

Where did I sayed anything about Streak? I did not. 

 

1 hour ago, ColonelPete said:

That is called making ships too strong. There is no need for RNG manipulation. I know of NO ship that overpeformed despite being weak. And I know of NO old strong ship that suddenly performed weak.

Again. You are talking about Extremes. Has nothing to do with making something "weak" or "overperforming". It is just making gameplay perceivably less or more enjoyable. 

[ColonelPete]

35 minutes ago, mariouus said:

Where did I sayed anything about Streak? I did not. 

 

Again. You are talking about Extremes. Has nothing to do with making something "weak" or "overperforming". It is just making gameplay perceivably less or more enjoyable. 

You were writing about getting worse results for a time. That is what is called a bad streak.

 

If a ship does not overperform, then there no increased incentive to buy it. Then it is just a normal ship. Your personal experience manifests AFTER buying it. To know that you get better results BEFORE buying it, makes it necessary that this increased performance is noticeable from the outside or in other words measurable.

[Pukovnik7]

5 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

How does a losing streak make me buy premium?

How are losing streaks possible when WG gifts everyone premium?

Why do some players without premium have less losing streaks than some players with premium?

Frustration. And premium ships (not premium time) aren't good enough to prevent that.

 

Buying premium time (as well as premium ships) is promoted by having a -+2 tier matchmaking spread, thus pushing everyone towards Tier 10.

[ColonelPete]

3 minutes ago, Pukovnik7 said:

Frustration. And premium ships (not premium time) aren't good enough to prevent that.

As I said, you can have that frustration with and without premium. What does buying premium change?

[Pukovnik7]

1 minute ago, ColonelPete said:

As I said, you can have that frustration with and without premium. What does buying premium change?

It doesn't need to change anything. All it needs is to give impression of changing something.

 

Also, see my point about the matchmaking spread. Combine these two factors, and is it really a surprise you have so many whales with between ten and a hundred matches running around with Tier 10 premiums? It is easy to fall into a losing streak and - especially if you were uptiered the whole time, and especially if losses were of the "ROFLSTOMP" kind - get frustrated and conclude that "I would have done better if only my ship was better". Humans are not exactly in a habit of blaming themselves for their mistakes, after all, so a player like that may indeed see a solution of their problems in getting to Tier 10 as quickly as possible - especially if their decision-making ability has been hampered by frustration. And such a player may buy either a premium time (if they are not in a massive hurry), or a Tier 10 premium ship (if they are). In both cases, WarGaming wins but playerbase loses.

[mariouus]

3 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

If a ship does not overperform, then there no increased incentive to buy it. Then it is just a normal ship. Your personal experience manifests AFTER buying it. To know that you get better results BEFORE buying it, makes it necessary that this increased performance is noticeable from the outside or in other words measurable.

For you and me there is no incentive. Many persons get their ship info from Review sites/channels - we can see WG murking water there - by giving OP ships for testing and nerfing them the last moment. Mutch more players gets their information from friend/clanmates and so on. If a friend sayes that - this new ships, while very similar - is more enjoyable to play - people will buy it. Alot of marketing (and frankly - Scams) works the same way. So this kind of thing is relatively common concept.

 

[ColonelPete]

24 minutes ago, Pukovnik7 said:

It doesn't need to change anything. All it needs is to give impression of changing something.

 

Also, see my point about the matchmaking spread. Combine these two factors, and is it really a surprise you have so many whales with between ten and a hundred matches running around with Tier 10 premiums? It is easy to fall into a losing streak and - especially if you were uptiered the whole time, and especially if losses were of the "ROFLSTOMP" kind - get frustrated and conclude that "I would have done better if only my ship was better". Humans are not exactly in a habit of blaming themselves for their mistakes, after all, so a player like that may indeed see a solution of their problems in getting to Tier 10 as quickly as possible - especially if their decision-making ability has been hampered by frustration. And such a player may buy either a premium time (if they are not in a massive hurry), or a Tier 10 premium ship (if they are). In both cases, WarGaming wins but playerbase loses.

If there is no change, then there is no manipulation.

And giving the impression of manipulation is the job of you guys.

There are probably quite a few people who buy premium because of that, just to make sure. WG should pay you for keeping these tinfoil hat theories alive

3 minutes ago, mariouus said:

For you and me there is no incentive. Many persons get their ship info from Review sites/channels - we can see WG murking water there - by giving OP ships for testing and nerfing them the last moment.

And THAT is something COMEPLETLY different.

One of the reasons WG removed the review of work in progress ships. That people could not complain that ships in game are worse than the version 8 weeks before during testing.

 

[Aethervoxx]

1 hour ago, Pukovnik7 said:

Frustration.

This is what you get when the 'contrarian' shows up. 'It' likes to argue while admiring it's typing efforts in a mirror.

 

[ColonelPete]

1 minute ago, Aethervoxx said:

This is what you get when the 'contrarian' shows up. 'It' likes to argue while admiring it's typing efforts in a mirror.

 

That happens when you bring weak arguments to the table.

Make-believe only brings you so far...

[Pukovnik7]

43 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

If there is no change, then there is no manipulation.

And giving the impression of manipulation is the job of you guys.

 There are probably quite a few people who buy premium because of that, just to make sure. WG should pay you for keeping these tinfoil hat theories alive

And again, point is that Wargaming does not have any reason to fix either matchmaking, map design or game mechanics. They are making game more irritating, more boring and objectively inferior with every new iteration simply for the sake of profit.

[mariouus]

29 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

And THAT is something COMEPLETLY different.

One of the reasons WG removed the review of work in progress ships. That people could not complain that ships in game are worse than the version 8 weeks before during testing.

 

But its not different - it is exactly the same.

 

They removed the Early Gameplay Reviews.  They did not change their practice of "starting" with OP ships did they? There are still alot on "initial" First look Reviews with those stats.Or am I wrong? It is called WOM (Word-of-mouth marketing). Basically now people will get info from tester they know and from friends who met those ships during testing. There is more clutter. When its a "good" clutter its a good thing for Marketing. 

 

It is highly unlikely WG remove "WIP" reviews because they wanted do avoid confusion. Rather Initial "OP" and later "Seriosly Nerfed" in reviews did kind of hurt sales. In Marketing perspective current system "First look" with better stats and later "First Impression" when realased is mutch better for WG. There are very few "Second Look" videos - when they nerf it. And generally "First Impression" consentrates on current stats and does not mention nerfs.