Big fish in little pond or small potato in big pond?

[loppantorkel]

People complain about bad players, potatoes, campers, bb-players, losing streaks, too quick battles, bad players reporting good ones, etc.

 

What if you could pick a more competitive random mode - you'd face better players, you'd lose more, have worse WR, more losing streaks and maybe get reported and abused in chat for bad plays, probably also face more OP ships and unicum divisions.

Would you rather play this and be a 48% WR-player, or would you pick the current mm where you have more potatoes in your team, but also face more bad players, allowing you to farm more damage and kills on expense of those worse players?

[Migulaitor]

If we have more than 57% WR both options increase player base skill 

 

[rvfharrier]

Absolutely, yes. Fun, close games between two evenly matched teams every game would be a huge improvement over what we have now. I always enjoy a close, fiercely contested loss much more than a landslide victory inside of 5 minutes and more of the former at the expense of the latter gets my vote. Close, fiercely contested wins would be even better of course!

[Dennyb]

I'd rather be the potato on the team. I played Tanks for years and once I got quite good at it...salty as [edited]at terrible teams. I started playing this and because I'm a potato I don't know when people are being bad because I'm also bad I don't get salty. Now I'm starting to get a grasp of the game, a bit more salt is seeping in from the ocean...not again, please.

[Ferry_25]

OP, I always respected your input in the forum. Now I'm a bit of a loss. I don't understand what you're asking here. Any way. My problem for the last half year or more is the ROFL stomp meta in wows. Either my team rolls up the reds or it's v.v. In all the "receiving" sides of the steamrolls I can't get my brains around the mere stupidity of the players on that match. I don't get it: it's beyond the "human factor." Heck, I make mistakes which are too stupid to be put into words. Quite frequently I might add. But 1 stupid player as I am manifesting occasionally shouldn't have that much influence on a battle. I remember a period in which I had epic losses. We congratulated the reds together for playing that well and v.v. Really a lot of "nailbiters" as well. Since my said time period it seems to have changed overnight. Very much boring, walkovers again and again: receiving and delivering. And that transition happened in a very short amount of time. What the heck is going on??

[Ferry_25]

I'd rather be the potato on the team. I played Tanks for years and once I got quite good at it...salty as [edited]at terrible teams. I started playing this and because I'm a potato I don't know when people are being bad because I'm also bad I don't get salty. Now I'm starting to get a grasp of the game, a bit more salt is seeping in from the ocean...not again, please.

 

Being the self exclaimed most utter [edited] for brains in numbers, seeing your stats even I can see you're doing a hell of a job in wows. Compared to your stats, mine are pathetic. Not to whine: only paying respect. There's only 1 secret in Ocean: it's the most realistic map ingame. Just keep moving and changing speeds and courses. All the time. Keep up your good work Dennyb. I think you're a formidable player.

[loppantorkel]

OP, I always respected your input in the forum. Now I'm a bit of a loss. I don't understand what you're asking here. Any way. My problem for the last half year or more is the ROFL stomp meta in wows. Either my team rolls up the reds or it's v.v. In all the "receiving" sides of the steamrolls I can't get my brains around the mere stupidity of the players on that match. I don't get it: it's beyond the "human factor." Heck, I make mistakes which are too stupid to be put into words. Quite frequently I might add. But 1 stupid player as I am manifesting occasionally shouldn't have that much influence on a battle. I remember a period in which I had epic losses. We congratulated the reds together for playing that well and v.v. Really a lot of "nailbiters" as well. Since my said time period it seems to have changed overnight. Very much boring, walkovers again and again: receiving and delivering. And that transition happened in a very short amount of time. What the heck is going on??

Thank you.

I'm not sure why you're experiencing these walkovers. They happen now and then, but I haven't noticed much change from earlier. Maybe there has been a large turnover in the playerbase.. experienced players might have left, leaving teams consisting of newer players to a greater degree. Clans and an increase of divisions probably make things more lopsided too. All changes aren't good.

 

The thing I'm asking is just whether you'd rather play in more competitive matches, in and against teams where the players are better than you, or in more casual matches like things are now, where you'd see both good and bad players, and where you'd be able to perform better and even at times carry the team to victory.

[Dennyb]

Being the self exclaimed most utter [edited] for brains in numbers, seeing your stats even I can see you're doing a hell of a job in wows. Compared to your stats, mine are pathetic. Not to whine: only paying respect. There's only 1 secret in Ocean: it's the most realistic map ingame. Just keep moving and changing speeds and courses. All the time. Keep up your good work Dennyb. I think you're a formidable player.

 

Well thanks, I try. Took me a good 800 or so games to finally learn how to shoot somewhat decently, haha. I wasn't talking about the map Ocean though, was a joke about the ocean and being salty...getting mad etc. One map that does annoy me is Tears of the Desert. Haven't played on it too much but very time I have it's been nothing but 20 minute max range campfests.

[Venatacia]

Never liked the one sided battles (same in WoT). I would rather have no win rate and have two teams equal and may the best team win.

[22cm]

Wrong. The real problem is not the skill MM, but the team victory. This makes the Win Rate the most important thing. And it s designed like this EXACTLY for the team to carry the potatoes to high tiers.

 

If the individual result of each player in a match would matter (how much damage or XP you had), the potatoes would not advance so easily to high tiers, which means less players buying premium time/ships for WG.

 

The fukking game rewarding the team win and not the individual result was DESIGNED like this. It will never change.

[loppantorkel]

Wrong. The real problem is not the skill MM, but the team victory. This makes the Win Rate the most important thing. And it s designed like this EXACTLY for the team to carry the potatoes to high tiers.

 

If the individual result of each player in a match would matter (how much damage or XP you had), the potatoes would not advance so easily to high tiers, which means less players buying premium time/ships for WG.

 

The fukking game rewarding the team win and not the individual result was DESIGNED like this. It will never change.

Of course team wins should be rewarded and shouldn't change. It's not designed for the potatoes to be carried, but designed this way because it's a team game. Two teams - the winning team is rewarded. This shouldn't change.

Question is - would you pick tougher mm for perhaps higher skilled games, but at a loss of WR?

[eliastion]

This sounds like a poll designed to get many dishonest answers 

 

...and many confused since people seem to believe that their WR plummets on weekends due to influx of noobs (basically - based on all these weekend-whine threads popping up every week - an incomprehensibly many players seem to be convinced that they would actually have higher WR% in the more skilled queue than in the potato one). 

[hgbn_dk]

Fact is that win rate alone can be tailored to suit you goal simply by choosing when and what to play. Done a little experiment the last week, been seeing a pattern for quite some time now. when playing during week days in the day hours or early evening my average win rate is 55-65 % This was done in US cruisers Tier VI-X... During weekends and late evening hours during week days is more cloudy and the win rate flux a lot from 40-55%. with the same ships.

 

Besides that if your goal is a 60% win rate just play until you reach that magical number and quit for today. 5 matches 3 won 2 lost. or 10 6 4.  It is just like being i a casino knowing when to stop playing to keep what you won.

 

http://eu.warshipstoday.com/signature/530080726/dark.png

Stats above to show my experiment...

[walter3kurtz]

This thread revolves around the idea that you can't have good stats when playing against equal opponents. This is not necessarily true because ELO / TrueSkill ranking can show strength relative to the "potato pool". And that is the only way that you can really differentiate in skill. So to get out of the low skill pool you would be to have a very high winrate, while after that 50% would be enough. The overall winrate is kind of meaningless.

 

But there is another problem because this game is imbalanced by design (not necessarily because of OP ships but because of tiers). One could be playing Imperator Nikolai at tier 4 for 500 games but that doesn't really say much about actual skill, more about the level of the opponents (low tier, probably not experiences). I don't see how you can fairly extract fair stats across the board for all tiers and say this player is worth X or Y.

[22cm]

Of course team wins should be rewarded and shouldn't change. It's not designed for the potatoes to be carried, but designed this way because it's a team game. Two teams - the winning team is rewarded. This shouldn't change.

Question is - would you pick tougher mm for perhaps higher skilled games, but at a loss of WR?

 

Dude, you re naive. Very.

[hgbn_dk]

I'm using the team score page in the battle results exclusively  to judge my own performance.. 90% of the matches I'm in top 3 win or lose... This is a more relevant tool to judge your own performance than win rate  alone, since win rate is solely based on the team effort

 

 

 

[RUSSIANBlAS]

I've got experience of both of what OP speaks of 

 

I'm "not bad" at this ships business but I'm currently an absolute WoT scrub 

[VC381]

I would love some skill based MM especially because it might make lower tiers more enjoyable.

[Gnirf]

This thread revolves around the idea that you can't have good stats when playing against equal opponents. This is not necessarily true because ELO / TrueSkill ranking can show strength relative to the "potato pool". And that is the only way that you can really differentiate in skill. So to get out of the low skill pool you would be to have a very high winrate, while after that 50% would be enough. The overall winrate is kind of meaningless.

 

But there is another problem because this game is imbalanced by design (not necessarily because of OP ships but because of tiers). One could be playing Imperator Nikolai at tier 4 for 500 games but that doesn't really say much about actual skill, more about the level of the opponents (low tier, probably not experiences). I don't see how you can fairly extract fair stats across the board for all tiers and say this player is worth X or Y.

 

Yes and the WR is also influenced if you are a collector or a dedicated player on a few ships with 19 p captains.

I play across the tiers naturally my WR suffers. My WR have been around 55 % since 1500 games , now I am over 10000 , that is because i have climbed the techtree, mostly from stock with new captains, yes new!. Very seldom moved or FreeXP the upgraded hulls etc until recently. The EliteXP for captains was a good thing for me. Now does this techtree climbing make me a player that has not inproved? Of course not .- that I can follow in the results in the lower/mid tiers which are increasing however most high tier ships have started with less good results and with better results after a while. It would have been easy to fix the stats a lot by playing only my most beloved ships. I have several well above 60 mark, soloplay in lower tiers, but do not care in my overall stats. But Ifollow them per ship WR/Dmg over the years incl. captainpoints to  see if I improve.

 

So I agree, what does 65% in Bogatyr says if you play T10 DD? Or 55 % WR Overall if I play a low tier boat?

Well one could always argue that recent form should make an impact perhaps with some value that values skill at higher/present tiers more but it is after all also a teamgame with coordination. How do you value a DIV player who pads his stats by divisioning OP ships when he plays SOLO in another not OP ship.  Yes I look sometimes up persons stats and the difference is sometimes huge between Solo/Div and often also very specialized in ships.

 

People that impresses me have good stats all over the board, solo play.

 

In ranked you have the competion - random has not the playerbase to be effiecient even if one somehow could think out of a system that takes the values into fair account. The programming effort set aside you have also language barriers etc.. It is a niche game this and I think the numbers that really do care in these things (i.e. will I start to play WOWS if there are MM skill based matchmaking in randoms or will I leave the game if it does not) are too few,

Clan things, developing ranked I think is the way to go. For me it is more important to present new content. 

 

But it is difficult to judge, many of us are real veterans which will always be a problem when new players enters. I wonder how the playerbase looks like? 

 

[Profilus]

------

Since my said time period it seems to have changed overnight. Very much boring, walkovers again and again: receiving and delivering. And that transition happened in a very short amount of time. What the heck is going on??

 

I believe it was the event that gave alot of tier 6 ships free for a little grind and many players missed learning curve thx to it and now they potato at tier 8+

[eliastion]

 

Dude, you re naive. Very.

 

Well, not as naive as people who think that victory and defeat are just a matter of luck rather than the effect of their contribution - at least in the longer run. If anything, the victory/defeat are taken too lightly by the system, giving too much incentive for selfish play.

[eliastion]

Besides that if your goal is a 60% win rate just play until you reach that magical number and quit for today. 5 matches 3 won 2 lost. or 10 6 4.  It is just like being i a casino knowing when to stop playing to keep what you won.

 

That's a terrible advice. Basically it means that when you are at the top of your game, you have fun playing and wins come easily - you should stop right away. When, on the other hand, you have a bad day, make mistakes and lose match after match, after match - your "system" encourages playing for HOURS, accumulating a MASSIVE lose streak because you keep losing more than you win, getting further and further from the 60% goal.

Systems like these don't work too well even in completely random games (unless you have infinite money to bet) but in a game that's heavily dependent on your performance? They're just so much worse.

[Al3xstar]

I like new players, mostly because its like the new harvest season, more potatoes to farm 

 

[hgbn_dk]

 

That's a terrible advice. Basically it means that when you are at the top of your game, you have fun playing and wins come easily - you should stop right away. When, on the other hand, you have a bad day, make mistakes and lose match after match, after match - your "system" encourages playing for HOURS, accumulating a MASSIVE lose streak because you keep losing more than you win, getting further and further from the 60% goal.

Systems like these don't work too well even in completely random games (unless you have infinite money to bet) but in a game that's heavily dependent on your performance? They're just so much worse.

 

I agree and I only wrote it as an example on how a win rate of 60% can be obtained.  My stats sucks because I play to have fun not good stats. If I wanted good stats I would use my example but I don't.

[eliastion]

 

I agree and I only wrote it as an example on how a win rate of 60% can be obtained.  My stats sucks because I play to have fun not good stats. If I wanted good stats I would use my example but I don't.

 

But your example would lead you to having WORSE stats since it quite literally promotes losing.

On a day when you play well, you're going to quit after a couple matches (or even one, if you happen to win right from the start). On bad days you'll play dozens of matches, losing most of them and droping your win% straight to hell because at some point you'll just quit without reaching the 60% mark.

 

Think this way:

1. good day, you play well, you win 1 match and quit with 100%

2. good day, you play well, you lose 2 matches, win 3 and quit with 60%

3. good day, you play well, you lose 1 match, win 2 and quit with 66%

4. bad day, you lose 4 matches and win 1. You don't quit, you keep playing but you're tired or sick (and probably angry) and can't focus so you lose another 3 and win 1. Then you get another victory after which you lose, win, win, win, lose, win, lose, lose, lose, win, lose... at this point you need to go to bed. So you quit with 12 defeats and 8 victories, giving you 40% winrate

It doesn't look so bad when you think that you got 100%, 60%, 66% and 40% in four days - problem is that the last day, the bad one, you played a lot - and not just by lack of luck, you played so much BECAUSE you played poorly and were losing. Leading you, in this particular example, to a grand total of 14 victories and 15 defeats over 4 days, leaving you with below 50% winrate - and that isn't because you generally suck: it's because you do your best to play a lot when you suck and only the bare minimum when you're performing well. The exact opposite to what could bring a good global win%.

 

There's a reason why in Ranked people who reach R1 tend to advise a system that's almost completely opposite to what you propose: to play while you're winning and quit for the day - or at least take a longer break - if you suffer 2 defeats in a row, whether it were your first 2 matches or 2 unlucky ones after a long gaming session. Playing to reach daily quota of progress (in Ranked) or a daily target win% in Randoms is just like a gambling addict who's losing but for some reason believes that if only he just keeps playing he'll get back at least to the starting point. And the actual expected result of such behavior is just like for that addict: he'll keep losing and end up with TERRIBLE balance for the day.