Matchmaker Discussion Thread & MM Balance

[Greuter29]

6 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

• Depends on your definition of recently. We had an announced change in Sept/Oct.
• Yes, MM considers the the ratio of high/low Tier games in your last 20 matches, to reduce low Tier matches on some Tiers
• No

 

Yes, but that change was a subset to address the number of up/down Tiered matches for an individual.
To be clear a change in dec/jan
And for statistic being on either Alpha side or Bravo side. You could decide upon ship.winrate or account.winrate or something else..

 

[HassenderZerhacker]

27 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

And would that be more believable than their statement that they do not rigg?

 

Either they rigg, then they will rigg any proof, that it looks like the do not rigg.

Or they do not rigg.

sure.

the log is directly verifiable with in-game events.

and then the frequency of streaks and in-game RNG can be checked against the appropriate statistical distributions.

[GarrusBrutus]

15 minutes ago, HassenderZerhacker said:

sure.

the log is directly verifiable with in-game events.

and then the frequency of streaks and in-game RNG can be checked against the appropriate statistical distributions.

Question: why do you think the game is rigged against you? Because in the grand scheme of things all your statistics are suggesting you're improving at a steady rate since you started playing (and so does your winrate). 

[ColonelPete]

29 minutes ago, Greuter29 said:

Yes, but that change was a subset to address the number of up/down Tiered matches for an individual.
To be clear a change in dec/jan
And for statistic being on either Alpha side or Bravo side. You could decide upon ship.winrate or account.winrate or something else..

 

There was no change in dec/jan.

WoWs does NOT use WR for MM.

29 minutes ago, HassenderZerhacker said:

sure.

the log is directly verifiable with in-game events.

and then the frequency of streaks and in-game RNG can be checked against the appropriate statistical distributions.

You do not need WG for that.

Just write down your results, there is even a mod for that. Some people are using it.

[HassenderZerhacker]

9 minutes ago, GarrusBrutus said:

Question: why do you think the game is rigged against you? Because in the grand scheme of things all your statistics are suggesting you're improving at a steady rate since you started playing (and so does your winrate). 

if it's not rigged, it should be easy to provide logs, right?

 

there is that nagging feeling that something *maybe* isn't right.

not rigged against me, but...

 

there are these streaks.

my loss streaks were always longer than win streaks.

 

when I was around the mark of 900 battles, there was this 12 battle loss streak.

I was 7 wins away from 50% WR.

 

here is something neat: a streak probabiity calculator:

https://sites.google.com/view/krapstuff/home

 

according to this, there was a 10% risk of such a streak in 900 battles.

10 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

You do not need WG for that.

Just write down your results, there is even a mod for that. Some people are using it.

yeah, well... just how about no?

got something better to do.

[Greuter29]

11 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

There was no change in dec/jan.

WoWs does NOT use WR for MM.

You do not need WG for that.

Just write down your results, there is even a mod for that. Some people are using it.

Fair enough... as you could have red in a previous post: average.ship.XP -speculation-
And in all fairness specifically you (/we) do not know if MM has changed or not.
But I would really not dwell into speculations too much.

Which is why I rather hear from a moderator or WG staff on if this is true or false.
They are working on it as we debate. So I'll just wait a while and see what they have to say.

[ColonelPete]

11 minutes ago, HassenderZerhacker said:

when I was around the mark of 900 battles, there was this 12 battle loss streak.

I was 7 wins away from 50% WR.

 

here is something neat: a streak probabiity calculator:

https://sites.google.com/view/krapstuff/home

 

according to this, there was a 10% risk of such a streak in 900 battles.

That means of 1000 average players, around 100 players will experience such a streak in 900 games.

That is not really rare.

7 minutes ago, Greuter29 said:

Which is why I rather hear from a moderator or WG staff on if this is true or false.
They are working on it as we debate. So I'll just wait a while and see what they have to say.

Mods have no insight into the business of WG, much less the code of WoWs...

They are just mods. Most of them do not even get paid (in money).

WG staff made it clear, publicly, multiple times, that MM works only according to the published rules and is otherwise random.

[Greuter29]

3 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

Mods have no insight into the business of WG, much less the code of WoWs...

They are just mods. Most of them do not even get paid (in money).

WG staff made it clear, publicly, multiple times, that MM works only according to the published rules and is otherwise random.

Whatever, you say. They do have links to the company.

This is not something you would post a ticket for but put on the forum according to the website.
Excavatus made it clear this was not to be posted in FEEDBACK section, but to the dedicated article. I presume here.

MM will always be a concern to everyone. Yes WG has said that it is random, but this does not mean they can or will not change it.
They do not have to inform the players about it either.

To be more precise with my motivation:
I do believe the MM is more or less random. I do not believe there is any rigging.

However!
I do believe that in recent updates last patch in 2019 or this year there has been a change with the following result:
A large amount of battles with a crushing side. Be it either Victory or Defeat this does not matter. What does matter is the general enjoyment from the game. Neither side will get a satisfying feeling of such a battle. These battles will not be totally unavoidable but the MM has done its role in the past to adjust it as best it could.

Recently we have seen numerous reports from a ton of streamers as well as my own findings and that of my follow clan mates. My own clan is getting demoralized as a result and at some point will quit the game entirely. Not because they were/are good or bad at the game but because they (as myself) are no longer finding the game enjoyable.
THIS to me is a big deal. I would rather trade in some of my wins for having exciting close battles than get disappointing games were one side totally dominates the other.

There HAS been a change of some sorts. I DO NOT know if this was the MM. But if so, I can at least say to my fellow clan mates, with an honest face, to ride it out and it will probably get better in the future. So we can enjoy this game once more like we have done in the past.

[ColonelPete]

7 minutes ago, Greuter29 said:

Whatever, you say. They do have links to the company.

This is not something you would post a ticket for but put on the forum according to the website.
Excavatus made it clear this was not to be posted in FEEDBACK section, but to the dedicated article. I presume here.

MM will always be a concern to everyone. Yes WG has said that it is random, but this does not mean they can or will not change it.
They do not have to inform the players about it either.

To be more precise with my motivation:
I do believe the MM is more or less random. I do not believe there is any rigging.

However!
I do believe that in recent updates last patch in 2019 or this year there has been a change with the following result:
A large amount of battles with a crushing side. Be it either Victory or Defeat this does not matter. What does matter is the general enjoyment from the game. Neither side will get a satisfying feeling of such a battle. These battles will not be totally unavoidable but the MM has done its role in the past to adjust it as best it could.

Recently we have seen numerous reports from a ton of streamers as well as my own findings and that of my follow clan mates. My own clan is getting demoralized as a result and at some point will quit the game entirely. Not because they were/are good or bad at the game but because they (as myself) are no longer finding the game enjoyable.
THIS to me is a big deal. I would rather trade in some of my wins for having exciting close battles than get disappointing games were one side totally dominates the other.

There HAS been a change of some sorts. I DO NOT know if this was the MM. But if so, I can at least say to my fellow clan mates, with an honest face, to ride it out and it will probably get better in the future. So we can enjoy this game once more like we have done in the past.

You have links to the company, too. That does not mean they will tell you trade secrets.

WG has shown in the last Q&A that the average battle time did not really change the past months.

[Greuter29]

6 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

You have links to the company, too. That does not mean they will tell you trade secrets.

 WG has shown in the last Q&A that the average battle time did not really change the past months.

Any link to that?
And what is the date of that

[ColonelPete]

3 hours ago, Greuter29 said:

Any link to that?

 

 

 

[loppantorkel]

Not exactly regarding 'rigging' but I've noticed a large amount of shimas most time I choose to play shima. Not so much when I play other dds. I haven't heard of any such MM feature. Could be an overwhelming number of shimas being played, but I don't think it should end up to such a degree that I've seen.

 

The question: Have you noticed it in solo games?

 

I might take some screenies on the upcoming games just to see if it's some bias, odd occurrences or if there might be some factor in the MM. Feel free to pay attention to this when you play shima.

[ForlornSailor]

2 minutes ago, loppantorkel said:

The question: Have you noticed it in solo games? 

 

During the last weeks ive come across games with either 0 shimas or 5 to 7 shimas. I even bought it up with some mates, that I play together last week, so this isnt confirmation bias because im reading it now from you. It seems really really really odd.

[loppantorkel]

1 minute ago, ForlornSailor said:

During the last weeks ive come across games with either 0 shimas or 5 to 7 shimas. I even bought it up with some mates, that I play together last week, so this isnt confirmation bias because im reading it now from you. It seems really really really odd.

I brought it up some weeks ago, but it kind of drowns out in this thread. Just saw Flamu playing a shima game and noticed - a large amount of shimas (and no cvs). Got me thinking again. ..and about the randomness and what WG tells us, or not.

[neorvo]

3 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/31444-some-interesting-info-around-the-world/?do=findComment&comment=3362862

Thanks

[ThePopesHolyFinger]

9 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

• Depends on your definition of recently. We had an announced change in Sept/Oct.
• Yes, MM considers the the ratio of high/low Tier games in your last 20 matches, to reduce low Tier matches on some Tiers

 

9 hours ago, Greuter29 said:

Yes, but that change was a subset to address the number of up/down Tiered matches for an individual.
To be clear a change in dec/jan

So, WG place you bottom tier in the majority of games. You lose those games and then get up-tiered, maybe sometimes top tier (but only when pigs fly by the blue moon)

And roflstomplefun happens.

Or your team is in the "balanced" down-tiered group and roflstomplefun happens.

 

But tiers are slightly irrelevant when WG enables sub 100 match players to play T7/8/9

 

Fubar still happens, and it isn't fun for either team.

[ColonelPete]

2 hours ago, DB2212 said:

 

So, WG place you bottom tier in the majority of games. You lose those games and then get up-tiered, maybe sometimes top tier (but only when pigs fly by the blue moon)

And roflstomplefun happens.

Or your team is in the "balanced" down-tiered group and roflstomplefun happens.

 

But tiers are slightly irrelevant when WG enables sub 100 match players to play T7/8/9

 

Fubar still happens, and it isn't fun for either team.

No. The ratios are known.

[Excavatus]

14 hours ago, HassenderZerhacker said:

QED.

I stopped playing WoT.

If WoWs goes into the same direction, then I will stop playing WoWs too. Simples.

Ok,

I respect that.

[RivvenDarke]

Will you ever fix it...??? EVER????

 

 

[DFens_666]

9 minutes ago, RivvenDarke said:

Will you ever fix it...??? EVER???? 

 

With the current new MM in testing, it should actually get worse imo:

They plan to get rid of battles with 3 CVs.

They want to have less battles with 2 CVs.

 

But the CVs in queue still have to be put somewhere, so what does that mean? At some point, they will get dumped with few surface ships like your screenshot showed, only it will happen more frequently

[ForlornSailor]

 

1 hour ago, RivvenDarke said:

Will you ever fix it...??? EVER???? 

 

 

 

It should not happen. As in: it should be restricted by the matchmaker. period. Make the CVs wait forever, throw 10 CVs without any other ship in one game or make them drop out of queue with the notice "sorry we could not find a game for you at this point". But THAT matchmaking on this screenshot is simply unacceptable. The new matchmaking changes are just side-grades - it will still happen! @MrConway @Crysantos - actually one of the few good posts here, it needs attention! Hard cap T4 CVs to one.

 

Anyone that says, this is fine ill invite to the trainingroom, ill bring two buddys of mine with Hoshos, you can bring 3 other guys with BB/CA/DD and we do this over and over and over again as long as you will admit, that its not fine.

[Floofz]

20 hours ago, Xevious_Red said:

And what stops the "it's obviously rigged" crowd from simply declaring that to be "fake" with an added line of "why would they go to these measures to prove it unless they have something to hide?".

 

A much simpler question is this;

 

"Why would making you lose make WG money?" - So far no-one has provided an answer to this. Who's benefiting from this "rigging"? Everytime these threads come up there's 100's of people claiming they are being rigged against, but the being rigged for is always some mystery player. 

 

 

 

Or you simply chose to not read it because Ive explained it multiple times.

[Yankmyplank]

On 2/16/2020 at 1:21 PM, ForlornSailor said:

 

Yea. Clear as daylight. still too many DDs around! those pesky little buggers still havent learned their lesson. Need more DD nerfs!

 

  Reveal hidden contents

/s ofc ^^

 

tbh the only DD I play with any enjoyment now is the friesland simply because of its AA deterrent, a CV will still win though even with that AA build because of the broken immunity planes have while regrouping.

 

[Crysantos]

3 hours ago, ForlornSailor said:

It should not happen. As in: it should be restricted by the matchmaker. period. Make the CVs wait forever, throw 10 CVs without any other ship in one game or make them drop out of queue with the notice "sorry we could not find a game for you at this point". But THAT matchmaking on this screenshot is simply unacceptable. The new matchmaking changes are just side-grades - it will still happen! @MrConway @Crysantos - actually one of the few good posts here, it needs attention! Hard cap T4 CVs to one.

 

Anyone that says, this is fine ill invite to the trainingroom, ill bring two buddys of mine with Hoshos, you can bring 3 other guys with BB/CA/DD and we do this over and over and over again as long as you will admit, that its not fine.

In our recent DevBlog post we've released upcoming changes as you know. It's a step in this direction, we'll see how it works out. I actually played quite some low Tier battles on Tier III-V on the NA server and the vast majority of CVs I ran into were regular players trying out CVs - not sealclubbers trying to min-max. Your training room scenario isn't really representative for the reality of these battles.

 

And we'll obviously keep monitoring this situation and make more changes if needed.

 

Greetings, Crysantos

[Yankmyplank]

On 2/17/2020 at 11:20 AM, Excavatus said:

WG is already doing something,

They did it before, they will do that again,

which is, "Declaring that the MM is not rigged but it is random!"

 

But people who chose not to believe those statements,

what do you suggest WG to do when people don't belive their statements and instead believe only their theories based on their subjective feelings based on very very few number of battles they play?

 

What do you do for example, when somebody says to you, "I don't believe a single word coming out of your mouth, because I have my own evidence, which is basically what I feel"

 

WG denied rigging the MM on WoT too, until a link to the US patents office showed they had in fact created a patent for doing exactly that. Then they banned anyone from game chat for a period who mentioned it. So from previous statements made by WG I know for a fact they not only lied about rigging the MM they gave chat bans to silence those that could prove different with real evidence.

 

I would like to think that WG have changed since that time but excuse me if I don't hold my breath waiting to find out.