Matchmaker Discussion Thread & MM Balance

[ColonelPete]

2 hours ago, DB2212 said:

Empty is what happens between your ears.
21,754 empty posts and you're worried about folk catching up with you?

 

Come on, with all your vast experience we dearly hope you can pass on something useful to us all.

We've yet to see anything useful from 26K posts. It's all spam and nothing helpful.

And again... 

When you lack arguments, better stay away from discussions. Primitive insults do not earn you brownie points.

[Squarebasher54]

You are a bunch of useless programmers WG you MM is a travesty of injustice. Please Please Please change it to WR on the individual ship or at least use that as a factror.

[GarrusBrutus]

13 minutes ago, Squarebasher54 said:

You are a bunch of useless programmers WG you MM is a travesty of injustice. Please Please Please change it to WR on the individual ship or at least use that as a factror.

[DFens_666]

1 minute ago, GarrusBrutus said:

 

Imagine running a bot when you cant play which keeps losing, so you get better teams once you play yourself

[GarrusBrutus]

2 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Imagine running a bot when you cant play which keeps losing, so you get better teams once you play yourself

"You mean play normally?" - half of the playerbase 

[Greek_Patriot]

One simple truth guys: WG doesnt care about making a decent MM. They will NEVER fix the MM. WG wants to favor a few players and screw all the others. Simple as that. They only care about the suckers that pay (and dont want to quit the game cause of their effort they have put all these years). Believe me there are thousands of players that want to quit this crap game but are reluctant to do so. Dont expect anything to change.. The game will keep getting worse and worse.

[Beaker71]

Tier 7 +2 MM is pretty bad,  but I can accept a challenge (although would prefer +/- 1 of course!)

I think this was the problem with the 3,5,7 MM in wot, and i've been getting quite a lot of this type of split recently in wows. When your top tier players suck, you really have no chance, and the game is decided by those three top tier players.

 

I'd rather be the lone tier 7 in an otherwise tier 9 game, because at least then there's a better chance of the bad players being spread out in both teams.

 

 

[DEVlAL]

On 2/24/2019 at 12:18 PM, DFens_666 said:

 

I usually havent put that much thought into, how things would turn out with +/-1 MM, because WG usually said they wont do it.

Since we have a discussion thread now, why not do it.

 

Ill base my answer on last weeks battles played on EU server from here: http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/20190223/eu_week/average_ship.html

So with +/-1 MM, T10 would only see T9 ships.

T10 ships battles played 309878

T9 Ships battles played 140128

So what does that mean? Basicly all the T9 ships will be absorbed into T10 games. Rarely it might happen that MM would create a T8 game with a few T9 ships.

In itself, this wouldnt even be bad, but if we go down the tiers now, imo it would create problems

 

T8 ships battles played 273294

T7 ships battles played 198183

T7 would be constantly uptiered vs T8, because T8 is played much more than T9, which is already dragged into T10 matches. T7 uptiers far worse even against T8 (T7 BBs get overmatched, but cant overmatch T8 BBs, while T7 DDs dont have access to concealment module which T8 DDs have and Cruisers uptier badly most of the time anyway) than T8 vs T10.

 

If you go down the tiers further, numbers drop ofc steadily (~200k T6 -> ~150k T5 -> ~110k T4).

 

Imo in order for +/-1 MM to "work properly" we would need to have more T9 ships played compared to T10 ships - that will never happen. One might argue, that T9 will be played even less in such a MM, as they would be basicly facing T10 only.

So from that pov, im against +/-1 MM.

Yeah that's not an argument. I'm on Tier VI ships and I get tiered up into battles with 8 out of 11 ships being Tier VIII. So people are already getting massively Tiered up. With +/-1MM it'd at least limit it to getting tiered up by 1 instead of 2, like it currently is.

[DEVlAL]

+/- 2 MM is BS. I haven't had a single enjoyable in game in Tier VI because of this stupid MM. Every single Game I play there's two, maybe 3 Tier VI ships, then one Tier VII if you're lucky and 7-8 Tier VIII. So I essentially have the choice between pussying out and staying way back because almost every single enemy outdamages and outranges by a significant margin, or actually play and get sunk 5 minutes in because everyone outdamages and outranges me.

[DFens_666]

4 minutes ago, DEVlAL said:

Yeah that's not an argument. I'm on Tier VI ships and I get tiered up into battles with 8 out of 11 ships being Tier VIII. So people are already getting massively Tiered up. With +/-1MM it'd at least limit it to getting tiered up by 1 instead of 2, like it currently is.

 

Between my post (1 year ago) and now, MM actually changed. You wont be bottomtier as often as you used to, but that only made it better for T8-9. It got worse for T6-7, because they get uptiered by 2 more often. T6 often faced T5-T7 before the change, which wasnt that bad, but now it faces T8 often. Similar for T7 which faces T9 more often. And we also have much more single tier matches on every tier.

 

btw i just played 3 T6 games, first one was 11xT6 + 1xT5 ship, 2nd was T5/6 mix and 3rd was T6-8. You have like 15 games on T6.. i doubt all of them were bottom tier vs T8.

 

[Saltface]

1 hour ago, DEVlAL said:

Yeah that's not an argument. I'm on Tier VI ships and I get tiered up into battles with 8 out of 11 ships being Tier VIII. So people are already getting massively Tiered up. With +/-1MM it'd at least limit it to getting tiered up by 1 instead of 2, like it currently is.

Why don't you stay in T3? You only get -1/+1 Matchmaking.

 

You only have 124 randoms, you don't even know how the game is played.

Even if you are Top Tier you would lose to two tiers down ships that know what they are doing.

 

You are denying yourself the learning process of the game. You will not learn if you get blapped in 5 minutes in every battle. 

 

You are very new and you have the chance to learn the game correctly. Do not repeat the mistake many of us did and rush the tiers. I did it and regretted it.

 

Go slow, step by step. Stay in low tiers until you win more than you lose. then go a STEP higher. And do the same.

At the end you will be a good player.

 

Your game, your choice.

 

 

[ForlornSailor]

1 hour ago, DEVlAL said:

I haven't had a single enjoyable in game in Tier VI because of this stupid MM.

Happened right now but what do I know...

 

 

...but ofc you are going to have a bad time if you push yourself into areas where you have no business. How about you start question yourself instead of blaming the mm? Because, you know, the enemy team does have T6 ships aswell. But they perform better then you do, since you are a factor to make teams, that you are a part of, lose. Thats what your stats tell. And you have no business on T6 anyway with 124 battles. You belong at >=T4, where you learn the basics of the game at a slower pace.

[Ladindell]

The current stated of the MM makes me really annoyed. More often than not, I find myself bottom tier. It is true that I can do some use even bottom tier but lets face it, if I sit in a tier 8 BB against tier 10 BB, I am smoked unless the T10 BB captain is a complete noob and show me broadside or do something else utterly stupid. Looking how I fare vs a T10 Cruiser, well, depends on the cruiser but most of them got torps so close range is a nono - if they dont have torps, they just sit on long range and burn me to death so... odds are not good here. Looking how a T8 BB would do vs a T10 DD, well, its only one outcome here, I am dead in any normal circumstance. The T10 DD torps are quite alot better than the T8 DD in terms of damage. I am not even going to bother with T8 BB  vs T10 CV cause its pointless.
 

Now, a +-1 tier would make it more fair and balanced (IMHO) and if  we are afraid of getting to long queues before getting into a battle why not make it possible for players to queue with more than one ship at a time? If I get into queue with a T6 and a T10, I'd automatically get placed into the match that has a open first ready. Anyway, just a suggestion, no idea if it has been brought up before.

I also think that with the current MM, few people will stick around if they are continiously forced to play vs 2 tiers higher, regardless of their tier. Want more people to enjoy the game, do some work  on the matchmaker cause in its current state its poor.

 

Anyway, just my take on the MM.
 

Lad

[__Hercules_]

23 hours ago, Ladindell said:

The current stated of the MM makes me really annoyed. More often than not, I find myself bottom tier. It is true that I can do some use even bottom tier but lets face it, if I sit in a tier 8 BB against tier 10 BB, I am smoked unless the T10 BB captain is a complete noob and show me broadside or do something else utterly stupid. Looking how I fare vs a T10 Cruiser, well, depends on the cruiser but most of them got torps so close range is a nono - if they dont have torps, they just sit on long range and burn me to death so... odds are not good here. Looking how a T8 BB would do vs a T10 DD, well, its only one outcome here, I am dead in any normal circumstance. The T10 DD torps are quite alot better than the T8 DD in terms of damage. I am not even going to bother with T8 BB  vs T10 CV cause its pointless.
 

Now, a +-1 tier would make it more fair and balanced (IMHO) and if  we are afraid of getting to long queues before getting into a battle why not make it possible for players to queue with more than one ship at a time? If I get into queue with a T6 and a T10, I'd automatically get placed into the match that has a open first ready. Anyway, just a suggestion, no idea if it has been brought up before.

I also think that with the current MM, few people will stick around if they are continiously forced to play vs 2 tiers higher, regardless of their tier. Want more people to enjoy the game, do some work  on the matchmaker cause in its current state its poor.

 

Anyway, just my take on the MM.
 

Lad

i dont see that much a problem to be uptired in a T8. But the most thing that are annoying me in the MM are not consideration how many matcher a player have play or ther win rate. I want a MM that takes that in consideration and not only which tier you are palying and ship. I have so many potato matcher recently ther my team average matcher plays was 3-4k and a win rate on 42% but the oppenets team did have over 9k matcher and 52% win rat in average.

So in a T8 in a T10 are good so long the the teams is balanced and not like my problem ther other team geat a big advantage

[Greuter29]

So, I no longer believe that the matchmaker is at fault for lob-sided games. From observations it true the MM does take some form of balancing being current.ship.XP() .

However I (and a lot of fellow community members) have been experiencing an increase of lob-sided games.
Now a few days (week) back there was a debate going on here about lob-sided games and correlation to game time.

It was ColonelPete that pointed towards this artical:

The argument being with lob-sided games would finish early and that from the data it would suggest that there is no increase in shorter game-times.
Concluding that what some of us have experienced was a bit of a random fluke.

 

However I am still skeptical. Luckily I think I am experiencing a mild decrease in these games (still not what it used to be). But I also noted that these lob-sided games are frequently ending in a 16+ minute game.

The problem with that observation is that the previous argument/conclusion is invalid.

 

I will continue to monitor these lob-sided games. But to be fair at this point I do not believe the MM is responsible for the lob-sided games. I am starting to believe it is a change in "Meta" game play. Possibly the result of recently released ships, although that is speculation at this point. 

[Greuter29]

1 minute ago, Greuter29 said:

But I also noted that these lob-sided games are frequently ending in a 16+ minute game.

Also does not benefit the mind-state playing another 10+ minutes when the game is pretty much over with the loss of 5-6 ships on only one team within 5 minutes.

[Greuter29]

4 minutes ago, Greuter29 said:

Possibly the result of recently released ships

 

4 minutes ago, Greuter29 said:

From observations it true the MM does take some form of balancing being current.ship.XP()

1 hour ago, __Hercules_ said:

I have so many potato matcher recently ther my team average matcher plays was 3-4k and a win rate on 42% but the oppenets team did have over 9k matcher and 52% win rat in average.

 

Combining these three might lead to the conclusion that there are a lot of players out there with "fresh" ship stats for the MM to make a Match.
If this is true time will balance things out eventually and at the moment the game is just in a rough state.

[__Hercules_]

4 minutes ago, Greuter29 said:

 

 

Combining these three might lead to the conclusion that there are a lot of players out there with "fresh" ship stats for the MM to make a Match.
If this is true time will balance things out eventually and at the moment the game is just in a rough state.

Ship xp has nothing to do with how good you are. I want a MM that going after average xp and battle so we get balancerad match so we dont get almos all Unicum in one team and potato players in the other.

[Greuter29]

4 minutes ago, __Hercules_ said:

Ship xp has nothing to do with how good you are.

That is just False. Granted XP does not always mean you win (although it does give you a 50% increase in base XP). You might even argue it is a better statistic then winrate.

Although with a small sample size on that ship played (say less then 30). A overall "bad" player could be regarded by MM as a good one. And vica versa a unicum player with less than 10 battles in that ship might be marked as a "bad" player.

[DFens_666]

2 minutes ago, Greuter29 said:

You might even argue it is a better statistic then winrate.

 

No, because the XP we see, is influenced by Premium account. So a worse player can have more XP if he is running premium account, compared to a better player not running premium.

[Greuter29]

2 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

No, because the XP we see, is influenced by Premium account. So a worse player can have more XP if he is running premium account, compared to a better player not running premium.

So people without premium are getting match making?

TBH I do not know if it is ship.XP or shipbase.XP 

I'll try to find that out.

[__Hercules_]

4 hours ago, Greuter29 said:

That is just False. Granted XP does not always mean you win (although it does give you a 50% increase in base XP). You might even argue it is a better statistic then winrate.

Although with a small sample size on that ship played (say less then 30). A overall "bad" player could be regarded by MM as a good one. And vica versa a unicum player with less than 10 battles in that ship might be marked as a "bad" player.

i did misspell I did mean i want a MM that going after average winrate and battles not xp

[ThePopesHolyFinger]

On 2/23/2020 at 11:11 AM, ColonelPete said:

And again... 

When you lack arguments, better stay away from discussions. Primitive insults do not earn you brownie points.

many, many posts do not earn you credence

 

 

 

Edit: use the quote function properly please.

[ColonelPete]

2 hours ago, DB2212 said:

 

Manipulating quotes does earn you even less brownie points.

I suggest you change that!

[humpty_1]

tier 10 mm this morning. all boats in the match are in the pic(random game)   loool