What is going on with the mismatchmaker lately?

[Ruth_clifton]

I  PLAY CO OP  NOW

[Captain_Breeze]

Just now, MarChil said:

No need, wasn't personal. Sorry I lashed out to to you.

You're all right mate, WoWS can make us all frustrated at times.

 

I've kinda got to a point where I realise they have their own agenda and we will not sway them.

 

Ultimately, I still love the game. I just have to change the way I play at times due to Subs ,CV's, Radars etc. So I do a lot more looking to see the enemy layout before rushing in.

[MarChil]

1 minute ago, Ruth_clifton said:

NO

What the dear colonel is trying to clear (but failing intentionally) is that MM is random, it's all you and WG doesn't make mistakes.

[MarChil]

1 minute ago, Captain_Breeze said:

You're all right mate, WoWS can make us all frustrated at times.

 

I've kinda got to a point where I realise they have their own agenda and we will not sway them.

 

Ultimately, I still love the game. I just have to change the way I play at times due to Subs ,CV's, Radars etc. So I do a lot more looking to see the enemy layout before rushing in.

I tend to rush when their is to much bullships around, not gonna waste time on boring or blow-out games that are created because WG can't get it's stuff together, grow a pair and start fixing core failings. 

 

About 20% of games are fun enough to compensate for the remainder. As long as WG can't get quality up to minimun levels, I don't intend to try and play well either.

[ColonelPete]

4 minutes ago, Ruth_clifton said:

NO

Too bad

3 minutes ago, MarChil said:

Sure it is, it's airtight. That's what he is paid for. Doesn't mean it's usefull or clarifying. 

Maybe consider your questions to him.

3 minutes ago, Ruth_clifton said:

I  PLAY CO OP  NOW

So the game does make matches for you?

2 minutes ago, MarChil said:

What the dear colonel is trying to clear (but failing intentionally) is that MM is random, it's all you and WG doesn't make mistakes.

Which I did not say or meant. Maybe speak for yourself, not for others.

[MarChil]

1 minute ago, ColonelPete said:

Which I did not say or meant. Maybe speak for yourself, not for others.

Love your blundness, your lovely tone and your complete lack of diplomacy. Don't change a thing, can't wait for the next.

[ColonelPete]

2 minutes ago, MarChil said:

Love your blundness, your lovely tone and your complete lack of diplomacy. Don't change a thing, can't wait for the next.

You want clear communication. You get it.

[nerderklaus]

7 hours ago, KillStealBoss said:

You can check the leaderboard on wows numbers, there's over 1000 accounts below 40%. 

Most of them with like 100-150 battles. The people who play tier 10 and superships all the time who deserve winrates below 10% certainly have a few thousand battles. The ones who do the retardation that you only see in matches with lots of tier 10 ships like all ships driving to one corner of the map.

[nerderklaus]

6 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

 

No they shouldnt. They are 1 out 12 people. Even if they go AFK they will end up between 30-40% depending what class they pick. The other reason is, that most players are just bad. So they are basically helping each other from going too low, because its likely to have many bad players on both teams. They are just filling material so to speak. If a game would be filled with bad players, its just a coin toss on who will win.

Often people who do things like doing straight to the corner in tier 10 ships play in divions and they are more likely to be toptier from playing tier 10 all the time and back in the day before superships meaning they could grief their team harder than 1/12 ships suggest... Additionally they might have played at times when MM couldn't fill 12vs12 and they might have played tier 10 when the MM spread was wider (f.e. +/-3) for even worse experiences for the poor bottom tiers.

[nerderklaus]

7 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

We all have the same MM. When you face a trend of sinking WR over many matches (500+), it is not the MM.

 

@nerderklaus

Your WR is stable. You even seem on an upward trend the past two years.

And you certainly are not stable. The OP already mentioned that I allways get rigged MM streaks when getting somewhere in the reach of 54.70%...54.80%

[nerderklaus]

5 hours ago, Hogger4169 said:

Matchmaker works in RANDOM pattern, Skill based matchmaker is forbidden so pray for RNGesus.

Sometimes you get a winning steak, feels goooooood and sometimes you are on a losing streak.

Since all of these are random when you facing a losing streak, log off, go for a walk to clear your mind and then log on again.......

 

You can't fight randomness.........

 

If the MM would be truly random, there wouldn't be many players who have much lower winrates on weekends...

 

Claims like you get an autowin for every autolose are as stupid as denying bias for the nation that dominated toptier balancing like no other nation...

[ColonelPete]

2 minutes ago, nerderklaus said:

And you certainly are not stable. The OP already mentioned that I allways get rigged MM streaks when getting somewhere in the reach of 54.70%...54.80%

That are fluctuations, which are normal.

Stop looking at your WR at short term.

[nerderklaus]

4 hours ago, Captain_Breeze said:

For sure MM is not perfect, but if you made it work in such a way as to have a mirror image of opposing teams through skill levels and ship types/radar etc, we could be waiting far longer to get into games.

Things like 4vs1 radar or 3vs1 radar are pretty common... 3 DDs vs 3 DDs with 0 CV with one team having only cap DDs and the other team only having camping DDs is fairly common as well... Just some examples that can decide a game and obviously: one team only having fragile ships

[nerderklaus]

2 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

That are fluctuations, which are normal.

Stop looking at your WR at short term.

Fluctuations like some measurement reaching UCL or LCL and being adjusted during production...

[ColonelPete]

5 minutes ago, nerderklaus said:

Fluctuations like some measurement reaching UCL or LCL and being adjusted during production...

It is called randomness.

Spoiler

 

1	0	1	1	1
0	0	0	1	0
0	0	0	0	0
0	1	0	0	0
1	1	1	1	1
0	0	1	1	1
1	0	0	0	0
0	1	0	0	1
0	1	1	0	1
1	0	0	1	1
0	1	0	1	1
0	0	0	1	1
1	0	1	0	0
0	1	0	1	0
0	0	1	1	0
0	1	1	0	1
1	1	1	1	0
0	0	0	1	0
1	1	0	1	0
0	0	0	1	1

https://www.random.org/integers/?num=100&min=0&max=1&col=5&base=10&format=html&rnd=new

 

[nerderklaus]

9 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

It is called randomness.

  Hide contents

 

1	0	1	1	1
0	0	0	1	0
0	0	0	0	0
0	1	0	0	0
1	1	1	1	1
0	0	1	1	1
1	0	0	0	0
0	1	0	0	1
0	1	1	0	1
1	0	0	1	1
0	1	0	1	1
0	0	0	1	1
1	0	1	0	0
0	1	0	1	0
0	0	1	1	0
0	1	1	0	1
1	1	1	1	0
0	0	0	1	0
1	1	0	1	0
0	0	0	1	1

https://www.random.org/integers/?num=100&min=0&max=1&col=5&base=10&format=html&rnd=new

 

No, it is called statistical process control

[ColonelPete]

6 minutes ago, nerderklaus said:

No, it is called statistical process control

There is no need for it. Randomness does that itself. But if one does not understand Randomness and considers ones improvement potential as limitless, one does not understand it.

[nerderklaus]

Just now, ColonelPete said:

There is no need for it. Randomness does that itself. But if one does not understand Randomness and considers ones improvement potential as limitless, one does not understand it.

Do you know Mr. Dunning and Mr. Kruger?

 

This post is like claiming that all ships are balanced to the same standards, independend of classes and nations or claiming that people get an autowin for every autolose or claiming that WG takes customer feedback serious...

[ColonelPete]

2 minutes ago, nerderklaus said:

Do you know Mr. Dunning and Mr. Kruger?

And that is your problem.

3 minutes ago, nerderklaus said:

This post is like claiming that all ships are balanced to the same standards, independend of classes and nations or claiming that people get an autowin for every autolose or claiming that WG takes customer feedback serious...

Where did I do that? Read the words I wrote, not your misinterpretations.

[Pandafaust]

I honestly don't understand why people continue to play a game whilst labouring under the apprehension that the developer is actively targeting them personally to ensure they lose.

 

 

 

 

[KillStealBoss]

3 hours ago, nerderklaus said:

Most of them with like 100-150 battles. The people who play tier 10 and superships all the time who deserve winrates below 10% certainly have a few thousand battles. The ones who do the retardation that you only see in matches with lots of tier 10 ships like all ships driving to one corner of the map.

Did you even check the leaderboard? You didn't cause must of them have 1-2k battles. Not 100-150. 

Numerous accounts have 5-7k . Like 87 at least. I saw just few accounts below 1k battles. 

[MarChil]

15 hours ago, nerderklaus said:

Most of them with like 100-150 battles. The people who play tier 10 and superships all the time who deserve winrates below 10% certainly have a few thousand battles. The ones who do the retardation that you only see in matches with lots of tier 10 ships like all ships driving to one corner of the map.

It's the result of the near m*r*nic policies WG keeps using. Wether it is plain stupidity or uncaring lazyness... Only WG has that information

15 hours ago, nerderklaus said:

No, it is called statistical process control

You really think that a company unable to get basic quality control right is capable of manupilation stats? The reason why rounds are so bloody bad is pure and simple incompetence on WG's part, nothing else. 

[DFens_666]

16 hours ago, nerderklaus said:

Often people who do things like doing straight to the corner in tier 10 ships play in divions and they are more likely to be toptier from playing tier 10 all the time and back in the day before superships meaning they could grief their team harder than 1/12 ships suggest... Additionally they might have played at times when MM couldn't fill 12vs12 and they might have played tier 10 when the MM spread was wider (f.e. +/-3) for even worse experiences for the poor bottom tiers.

 

If its a div, its not 1/12 players. Sure an idiot 3x div can probably have like 15% WR or so. And only because every x games they have a 3x super unicum div carrying them, or a similar 3x noob div on the enemy team.

[Hogger4169]

20 hours ago, nerderklaus said:

If the MM would be truly random, there wouldn't be many players who have much lower winrates on weekends...

 

Claims like you get an autowin for every autolose are as stupid as denying bias for the nation that dominated toptier balancing like no other nation...

The matchmaker is random, and even more random from random randomness of the most random randomness...

To be a bit serious afaik the teram composition the only rules apply are equal teams in ships types. 

Also the skill on players teams is random too, it picks 12 on a team and 12 on b team while it keeeps the ships types rule i mentioned above.

The winrate of players is random too, in most cases are good players vs bad players, a skill based matchmaker would prevent that, explain to me how on earth one team has radar ships while other team has not?? It looks random to me, ruless that apply to equal equipment ships on both teams happen... you guessed it RANDOM!!!!

 

SO, it's all random here, even me!!!!

Have fun.....

[nerderklaus]

On 2/11/2023 at 6:35 PM, ColonelPete said:

And that is your problem.

Where did I do that? Read the words I wrote, not your misinterpretations.

 When you enter a room the average IQ in there drops by 50. Either you are a paid WG troll or you must know that for some reason you have a winrate higher than what you deserve.

 

On 2/11/2023 at 6:49 PM, Pandafaust said:

I honestly don't understand why people continue to play a game whilst labouring under the apprehension that the developer is actively targeting them personally to ensure they lose.

Whats the reason then for some people getting 55% even when being AFK all the time and 55% being almost impossible to get with other accounts and not doing any big mistakes? Today again 3 matches without major mistakes and 3 clear losses. If I would get unlosable games to compensate for unwinnable games, I would have a 4-digit winning streak without playing well in a single match, but instead I get more unwinnable games and no unlosable games.

 

On 2/11/2023 at 8:45 PM, KillStealBoss said:

Did you even check the leaderboard? You didn't cause must of them have 1-2k battles. Not 100-150. 

Numerous accounts have 5-7k . Like 87 at least. I saw just few accounts below 1k battles. 

Better get some glasses, in the last 3 pages there even are lots of accounts below 100 battles.

 

On 2/12/2023 at 9:23 AM, MarChil said:

It's the result of the near m*r*nic policies WG keeps using. Wether it is plain stupidity or uncaring lazyness... Only WG has that information

You really think that a company unable to get basic quality control right is capable of manupilation stats? The reason why rounds are so bloody bad is pure and simple incompetence on WG's part, nothing else. 

It's the usual stuff with big companies, good employees and bad employees. Usually there are lots of idiots in the administration, most notable with managers who only have their position for a female quota. Low performers and management positions don't go together in a good way.

 

WG wouldn't have acquired so many players, if they failed everything. The math behind such SPC is much easier than the math for the shell ballistics, just an example.