Matchmaker Discussion Thread & MM Balance

[Smegger213]

53 minutes ago, deathsadow said:

Guess the decent players are still grinding the aniversary rewards in co-op ... since last week i see more sub 45% in randoms than 50%+ regardless of side, and man they love DDs and BBs so they can throw games fast.

 

At least it is easy to farm dmg on them, but the game is getting pretty boring when its allways the same potato tactic ... DDs rush to death and all die in max 5-6min , BBs camp far back missing their shots and getting fire farmed, Is ranked any better or its the same clow fiesta where you should kite and HE spam cause the meta is that boring crap.

I have got to the stage that 75% of the time, I cannot even be bothered to play.

I just log in for whatever free item is for that day, then I quit.

 

Or if I do play, I will just play enough games to get the 3 free containers per day.

 

This has been caused by partly as a result of the garbage matchmaker.

But mainly, by my absolute hatred of subs being in random battles.

 

Well, played Wargaming.

You drive me further away from enjoying the game with every update. 

[deathsadow]

9 minutes ago, Smegger213 said:

I have got to the stage that 75% of the time, I cannot even be bothered to play.

I just log in for whatever free item is for that day, then I quit.

 

Or if I do play, I will just play enough games to get the 3 free containers per day.

 

This has been caused by partly as a result of the garbage matchmaker.

But mainly, by my absolute hatred of subs being in random battles.

 

Well, played Wargaming.

You drive me further away from enjoying the game with every update. 

Same here i just play 2-3 round and move to play another game for a year or 2 already, sometimes the MM stops being crap and i have a few close games and play like 8-10 round but thats getting rare, most of the time the MM is filled with players who are low IQ campers and the game is basically the team with the decent division running over the camper bots.

 

WG should really separate the MM into players who want to play WoWs and the ones who want to push redline and keep losing.

[ImTryingButYouDontHelp]

Yeah, WG....you fixed it?  01:52 minutes? 

 

 

[Bear__Necessities]

Completely unplayable, awful MM. Never gonna get anywhere.

 

 

Ohhhh...

[MarChil]

7 hours ago, Bear__Necessities said:

Ohhhh...

Sealclubber alert :-P

 

Have day that I easy win all games, doesn't mean I have a good day. Running after a doomed enemy is, in my opinion, not what makes a game playable or not... But have it your way.  

[Smegger213]

8 hours ago, Bear__Necessities said:

Completely unplayable, awful MM. Never gonna get anywhere.

 

 

Ohhhh...

Is that one players stats with those 2 ships or what?

I don't see the point of that table without any context to refer to?

[ColonelPete]

6 minutes ago, Smegger213 said:

Is that one players stats with those 2 ships or what?

I don't see the point of that table without any context to refer to?

So you are saying that a single screenshot without context does not say much?

[Smegger213]

16 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

So you are saying that a single screenshot without context does not say much?

All it says is Z-31 8 battles, 62.5% win rate etc, etc, etc.

That's all it tells us, so what is it supposed to be saying?

 

Even a poor player can play a ship for 8 battles, and get lucky and win 62% of those battles.

So that table is meaningless without an explanation.

Plus he says " Completely unplayable, awful MM. Never gonna get anywhere."

But I want to know what that table has to do with " Completely unplayable, awful MM"?

[ColonelPete]

14 minutes ago, Smegger213 said:

All it says is Z-31 8 battles, 62.5% win rate etc, etc, etc.

That's all it tells us, so what is it supposed to be saying?

 

Even a poor player can play a ship for 8 battles, and get lucky and win 62% of those battles.

So that table is meaningless without an explanation.

Plus he says " Completely unplayable, awful MM. Never gonna get anywhere."

But I want to know what that table has to do with " Completely unplayable, awful MM"?

According to you, the screenshots of teams, that are plastered all over this thread are therefore meaningless too. Thx.

[Bear__Necessities]

1 hour ago, MarChil said:

Sealclubber alert :-P

 

Have day that I easy win all games, doesn't mean I have a good day. Running after a doomed enemy is, in my opinion, not what makes a game playable or not... But have it your way.  

Yes, playing solo at a tier that regularly goes up against 2 tiers above in ships seen as weak is "Seal clubbing"....

 

15 minutes ago, Smegger213 said:

get lucky and win 62%

Getting lucky an awful lot of the time.... 

https://na.wows-numbers.com/player/1036458028,Vasili_One_Bonk_only/

 

16 minutes ago, Smegger213 said:

But I want to know what that table has to do with " Completely unplayable, awful MM"?

It's called sarcasm. 

[Smegger213]

9 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

According to you, the screenshots of teams, that are plastered all over this thread are therefore meaningless too. Thx.

OK then wise guy.

Apart from this screenshot, I have not said anything of the sort.

I believe this is the first time I have described a screenshot post as meaningless.

 

What I did say was "Its pointless posting screenshots of unbalanced teams by a skill such as win rate". Or words to that effect.

IE It is pointless shouting for a skill based matchmaker, because Wargaming will NEVER EVER BRING A SKILL BASED MM INTO THE GAME.

[MarChil]

20 minutes ago, Bear__Necessities said:

Yes, playing solo at a tier that regularly goes up against 2 tiers above in ships seen as weak is "Seal clubbing"....

The irony...

[Bear__Necessities]

Just now, MarChil said:

The irony...

I don't think you know what irony means.

[MarChil]

Just now, Bear__Necessities said:

I don't think you know what irony means.

Never mind, can't expect you to follow my way of thinking. I was referring to the comment about sarcasm.

[Smegger213]

18 minutes ago, Bear__Necessities said:

Yes, playing solo at a tier that regularly goes up against 2 tiers above in ships seen as weak is "Seal clubbing"....

 

Getting lucky an awful lot of the time.... 

https://na.wows-numbers.com/player/1036458028,Vasili_One_Bonk_only/

 

It's called sarcasm. 

Most players describe Seal Clubbing as a player that stays at low tiers, and plays an OP ship  or tank at those low tiers.

So they can prey on the new players and get stats that make them look good players.

EG in WoT you get players that play the tier 3 Premium French TD FCM 36 Pak 40 exclusively, and prey on the noobies.

 

That player you shared has very good stats indeed.

But you do occasionally see Super Unimum players.

That table you shared was just that guys latest 14 games played.

[Bear__Necessities]

1 minute ago, MarChil said:

Never mind, can't expect you to follow my way of thinking. I was referring to the comment about sarcasm.

I don't anybody can follow your "way of thinking" when what you post makes no sense. 

 

1 minute ago, Smegger213 said:

Most players describe Seal Clubbing as a player that stays at low tiers, and plays an OP ship  or tank at those low tiers.

So they can prey on the new players and get stats that make them look good players.

EG in WoT you get players that play the tier 3 Premium French TD FCM 36 Pak 40 exclusively, and prey on the noobies.

 

That player you shared has very good stats indeed.

But you do occasionally see Super Unimum players.

That table you shared was just that guys latest 14 games played.

But according to this thread, MM is awful and goes out of it's way to make players lose. So surely I should be losing. Not winning almost 68% of my games consistently? And there is clearly no seal clubbing, just grinding through silver line tech tree ships. Mostly solo. 

[ColonelPete]

13 minutes ago, Smegger213 said:

OK then wise guy.

Apart from this screenshot, I have not said anything of the sort.

I believe this is the first time I have described a screenshot post as meaningless.

 

What I did say was "Its pointless posting screenshots of unbalanced teams by a skill such as win rate". Or words to that effect.

IE It is pointless shouting for a skill based matchmaker, because Wargaming will NEVER EVER BRING A SKILL BASED MM INTO THE GAME.

You said yourself that the results on the screen can be the result of luck. That applies to all screens.

[MarChil]

Just now, Bear__Necessities said:

I don't anybody can follow your "way of thinking" when what you post makes no sense. 

 

I don't expect anybody to do.

 

1 minute ago, Bear__Necessities said:

MM is awful and goes out of it's way to make players lose.

Nope, MM is a piece of garbage -period- Oh well, can't expect a clueless bunch of wannabees to build a solid piece of programming. Besides, MM is the least of the fails WG has produced lately, it's just the most obvious.

[Smegger213]

2 minutes ago, Bear__Necessities said:

 

But according to this thread, MM is awful and goes out of it's way to make players lose. So surely I should be losing. Not winning almost 68% of my games consistently? And there is clearly no seal clubbing, just grinding through silver line tech tree ships. Mostly solo. 

Well, I didn't say you were a Seal Clubber mate.

[Bear__Necessities]

Just now, Smegger213 said:

Well, I didn't say you were a Seal Clubber mate.

Seal clubber bit was still aimed at the other dude trying to play clever in the thread.

[Smegger213]

2 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

You said yourself that the results on the screen can be the result of luck. That applies to all screens.

I didn't say that. Yet again, you get the facts wrong.

I said even a poor player can get lucky and win 62% of the time out of 8 games played.

Remember that you don't have to play well to win if the other players on your team happen to play well and carry the game for you.

 

But now that Bear has shared the guys stats, we can see that that guy is a very good player indeed.

So in his case, it probably wasn't down to luck.

[ColonelPete]

Just now, Smegger213 said:

I didn't say that.

 

54 minutes ago, Smegger213 said:

Even a poor player can play a ship for 8 battles, and get lucky and win 62% of those battles.

 

[Smegger213]

2 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

 

 

I guess it just proves that you cannot read.

 

You said:

Quote

You said yourself that the results on the screen can be the result of luck. That applies to all screens.

I did NOT say the results on that screen were the result of luck.

 

I said:

Quote

Even a poor player can play a ship for 8 battles, and get lucky and win 62% of those battles.

That statement has nothing to do with "ALL SCREENS".

 

I just implied that any player can get lucky and win 62% of their games in the one ship.

If they play that same ship for 8 games straight it can be easy to win 5 games out of those 8, if they happen to get good teams.

[ColonelPete]

4 minutes ago, Smegger213 said:

I guess it just proves that you cannot read.

 

You said:

I did NOT say the results on that screen were the result of luck.

 

I said:

That statement has nothing to do with "ALL SCREENS".

 

I just implied that any player can get lucky and win 62% of their games in the one ship.

If they play that same ship for 8 games straight it can be easy to win 5 games out of those 8, if they happen to get good teams.

If a person can get lucky, so can everyone else...

... which applies to all the result and team screens we see in this thread...

[MarChil]

30 minutes ago, Bear__Necessities said:

Seal clubber bit was still aimed at the other dude trying to play clever in the thread.

It must have really hurt you, that wasn't the intention. Shame that the subtle parts do not reach you, you might have had a much better evening, maybe even a slight smile.