Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
G01ngToxicCommand0

Skill based teams now please

36 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
3,695 posts
10,594 battles
22 minutes ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

As the title says skill based teams now because the current setup is ruining the game.

Skill based teams never, because the current set-up works and skill-based one would kill the game.

 

Anyway, you're not exactly new to the Forum. The topic of skill-based MM has been talked about A LOT. It's being brought up over and over again. WG has very clearly stated their opinion on the thing (saying that this is not going to happen) and the arguments (both for and against) skill-based MM are hardly fresh - the same ones get used every single time. So, I can understand that someone relatively new to the Forum would come up and feel the need to ask for skill-based MM... but you? What's the point of another meaningless thread about it? I mean, we've had at least one this month already... And your opening post doesn't even have any argumentation (hell, it lacks explanation of what exactly you want, because there are at least two major approaches to "skill-based teams").

 

So, seriously, what's the point of creating this thread at all?

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,929 posts
7,756 battles
12 minutes ago, eliastion said:

Skill based teams never, because the current set-up works and skill-based one would kill the game.

 

Anyway, you're not exactly new to the Forum. The topic of skill-based MM has been talked about A LOT. It's being brought up over and over again. WG has very clearly stated their opinion on the thing (saying that this is not going to happen) and the arguments (both for and against) skill-based MM are hardly fresh - the same ones get used every single time. So, I can understand that someone relatively new to the Forum would come up and feel the need to ask for skill-based MM... but you? What's the point of another meaningless thread about it? I mean, we've had at least one this month already... And your opening post doesn't even have any argumentation (hell, it lacks explanation of what exactly you want, because there are at least two major approaches to "skill-based teams").

 

So, seriously, what's the point of creating this thread at all?

Non skill based teams are killing the game now but at least skill based teams will make the game fun for some rather than for non.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RNG4]
Beta Tester
1,568 posts
On 12/22/2017 at 12:00 AM, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

Non skill based teams are killing the game now but at least skill based teams will make the game fun for some rather than for non.

 

You mean it will >probably< make the game fun for you?

Because I can have fun with the current system and why should mine or anyone else's fun count for less than your's?.

 

The cons against and problems with skill based MMs (be it a league system or just the balancing of good and bad players on each team) where discussed in your other thread about this topic and as long as you can't present any solutions I don't see the point with this thread and why it shouldn't take the same end.

Edited 

 

 

This post has been edited by the moderation team due to inappropriate content. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,929 posts
7,756 battles
On 12/22/2017 at 12:13 AM, Tungstonid said:

 

You mean it will >probably< make the game fun for you?

Because I can have fun with the current system and why should mine or anyone else's fun count for less than your's?.

 

The cons against and problems with skill based MMs (be it a league system or just the balancing of good and bad players on each team) where discussed in your other thread about this topic and as long as you can't present any solutions I don't see the point with this thread and why it shouldn't take the same end.

Edited

 

No it would make the game fun for more players than it do now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RNG4]
Beta Tester
1,568 posts
Just now, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

No it would make the game fun for more players than it do now.

 

And your source for this is...?

Have you done any statistically relevant poll with random people to determine that or is it just you and some of your friends saying that on your private voice chat server?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,929 posts
7,756 battles
1 minute ago, Tungstonid said:

 

And your source for this is...?

Have you done any statistically relevant poll with random people to determine that or is it just you and some of your friends saying that on your private voice chat server?

The arguments are sound but all of you nay sayers just don't have the imagination to see why they are and why skill based team are the best for the game it it would appear. Sad to watch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DUXTR]
Alpha Tester
455 posts
5,682 battles

Just google wot or this forum instead of opening another thread about this subject.

WG have stated they will never put in skilled MM.

And how will u balance the skill?

On stuff u can pad?

Play CW if u want skilled MM. Let the rest of us have the randomness of random.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WOTN]
Quality Poster
2,035 posts
13,625 battles

I don't know about you, but I rather like being able to farm the fries and tomatoes. If I get put in a team that is too weak and I lose, then I simply am too weak of a player to have carried them. With that attitude, I find the game far more tolerable.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RNG4]
Beta Tester
1,568 posts
2 minutes ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

The arguments are sound but all of you nay sayers just don't have the imagination to see why they are and why skill based team are the best for the game it it would appear. Sad to watch.

 

You claim skill-based MM will improve the game, yet you fail time after time to give solutions for necessarily arising problems which will lead to the contrary.

You claim the overall happiness of players and the fun will increase with the implementation of skill-based MM, yet you can't provide any statistics to prove this point.

And if making claims without evidence doesn't work, your opposition "just lacks imagination" to see why what your are claiming is true.

 

That's the way to go. This will make you win any argument. /sarcasm

You should think about a career in politics.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,929 posts
7,756 battles
1 minute ago, Tungstonid said:

 

You claim skill-based MM will improve the game, yet you fail time after time to give solutions for necessarily arising problems which will lead to the contrary.

You claim the overall happiness of players and the fun will increase with the implementation of skill-based MM, yet you can't provide any statistics to prove this point.

And if making claims without evidence doesn't work, your opposition "just lacks imagination" to see why what your are claiming is true.

 

That's the way to go. This will make you win any argument. /sarcasm

You should think about a career in politics.

The arguments have been presented time and time again on other threads but you are too stubborn or narrow minded to accept them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SNUBS]
Players
1,230 posts
6,341 battles

you keep trying . but its not gonna work.

 

i WOULD however  like some MM balancing . no 5 dds per side or 5 bbs per side.

radars and smoke cruisers balancing as well. 

if they would try that it will make games more fun to play.  you will probably get less roflstomps. 

 

ofc it will  pump up game loading time. but just like with COOP if it  wont happen after half a minute just expand the search  to allow more. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RNG4]
Beta Tester
1,568 posts
2 minutes ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

The arguments have been presented time and time again on other threads but you are too stubborn or narrow minded to accept them.

And the "arguments" have been rebutted time and time again in other threads but you are too stubborn to accept this.

 

So, unless you can provide anything substantial for your arguments or against any counter-argument, nothing will change.

You can go with "it will improve the game" or "it will make the majority of players happier" all day long but without backing it up or at least explaining why you think it will do so and why already mentioned problems won't arise, it adds nothing to the discussion. At least nothing new.

 

Btw: If you are not interested in a discussion but only want people to agree with you... Tell me and the rest of the readers so we can ignore you.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
516 posts
4,160 battles

Huh, I was wondering when a new one of these threads would pop up... it's been almost a week! :Smile_trollface:

 

Screw skill-based MM, just have the matchmaker balance radars between teams and I'm game! Had a game today where the reds had 5 radars and we had none. That was great fun for me in my Z-46... /s At least it was over quickly... :cap_fainting:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,654 posts
11,443 battles
31 minutes ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

The arguments have been presented time and time again on other threads but you are too stubborn or narrow minded to accept them.

Please enlighten me as I have yet to see those arguments. So far all I've read in these topics are opinions...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[W_I_G]
Players
3,168 posts
9,352 battles
2 hours ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

As the title says skill based teams now because the current setup is ruining the game.

 

you had CB till yesterday. it was purely skilled based MM. and it was enjoyable.

also you have "skill" based ranked. if you get to rank 5 early you can get pretty enjoyable games, but that worsens over time.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
3,695 posts
10,594 battles

Oh, I found a nice sentence explaining why we won't ever see skill-based MM. You see, it's a bad idea and...

1 hour ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

The arguments have been presented time and time again on other threads but you are too stubborn or narrow minded to accept them.

Please, if you want to call people out on some behavior, make sure the same phrase doesn't 100% apply to you with sides switched.

 

Or, in fact - make sure it doesn't apply to you MORE. Because others argue for status quo - and it's the job of the person proposing a change to provide arguments for the change and respond properly to arguments against it. Basically, unless you can refute the arguments against skill-based MM, your thread is just a useless "me wants" of someone unable to grasp the reasons for why his brilliant idea might not be all that brilliant after all. The current system has a big advantage over yours - it's proven to work. It works in WoT, it works in War Thunder and it actually woks here - the playerbase is stable with a slight upwards trend, showing that people do, in fact, enjoy the game (why would they stick around otherwise). Of course, an improvement to something that works is still possible and just working doesn't mean that things couldn't be better. But any change to something that works carries the inherent risk of it ceasing to work. Of course, most changes are very small and can have a big impact only if enough small things get screwed up over some time - but you're not arguing for a small change. You want a big one, a re-definition of the core principle on which the way people are assigned to matches and teams within a match. And most importantly - you want a change that would be an experiment.

No other game similar to WoWs uses skill-based MM in solo queue. And the one game that did actually use a form of SBMM... gave up on it since it was a disaster driving people away from the title.

 

In the end - you believe that skill-based MM would improve the game. Unfortunately, what we're getting here is little more than your declaration of faith in the concept. You fail to provide an outline of the system that wouldn't actually break the game and ruin people's fun. You demand a revolution that would change the base principles of the game - yet you fail to tackle the obvious drawbacks and easy to identify risks stemming from the concept of SBMM.

 

Sorry, but when you go around the issue this way, you can be sure that nobody in their right mind would take your propositions seriously.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,929 posts
7,756 battles

the only reason you do not want skill based teams is because you don't want your winrate to drop, which is why you keep, and wrongfully so, that skill based teams can not work. Skill based team is about quality of play not stat Edited which is what you want to keep as status quo. Fair enough but don't hide your motives behind false arguments. You know I am right and that you are wrong so please stop posting on this thread and stop trying to stir up trouble. TYVM

 

 

This post has been edited by the moderation team due to inappropriate remarks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
3,695 posts
10,594 battles
On 12/22/2017 at 2:25 AM, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

the only reason you do not want skill based teams is because you don't want your winrate to drop, which is why you keep, and wrongfully so, that skill based teams can not work. Skill based team is about quality of play not stat Edited which is what you want to keep as status quo. Fair enough but don't hide your motives behind false arguments. You know I am right and that you are wrong so please stop posting on this thread and stop trying to stir up trouble. TYVM

 

Nice combination of strawman and ad personam attack.

 

What would be nicer, however, is actually addressing the "false arguments" given by all these people who "don't want their winrate to drop". Because, I'm sorry to say, if you fail to defeat the "false arguments" then there are only two options:

1. They might be sound, valid arguments after all, regardless of your insinuations regarding motives of people voicing them

or

2. You are incapable of understanding the issue well enough to defeat even bad, "false" arguments... but in that case, where does your certainty that you are right come from?

 

PS: Is Wargaming (and other companies that produce games similar to World of X trio) also against skill-based matchmaking because they are stat-Edited  and fear their executives' winrates going down?

 

This post has been edited by the moderation team due to inappropriate remarks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
545 posts
4,181 battles

The problem is that most of forum members are good with non-skill MM because they care about WR and not about game, for them it is good when they win a retarded 7 min game with 10:0 ships advantage  because win is a win, they are afraid that skill MM would hurt there WR because they would play in the same league with the players of there skills and not seal clubbing players that have av dam of 25k with his T10 BB...

 

You all want a argument - well Clan battles had skill league system, if your team was good you could go to in top league and stay there if not you would fall in league below and than after some time you would be in always league that you deserve with the clans that are same or close to your in skill ------ what is wrong with that ??????  There had been never better system than this season clan battles in this game, the best experience,  competitiveness, great gameplay since game get out  !!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-T-O-]
Alpha Tester, Players, In AlfaTesters
1,970 posts
5,450 battles

Yes, and I would like fried oyster skins with that.

 

Now seriously we already have plenty of topics like this one on this forum and the answer was always the same - NO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DUXTR]
Alpha Tester
455 posts
5,682 battles

I`ve tried skillbased MM in AW. Players left in hordes. Some came back when they realized the massive Edited  they did.

But the game more or less died.

And again. How will u balance a game on stuff u can pad?

U see the same in wot. Low tiered padding that gives u horrible hightier players, cause they aren`t really good.....but their stats are.

And remember. It`s not just the "skill" u need to calculate for. It`s the tier, type of boat, how many of the given type in que etc.

And when u eventually punishes the good players down to 50% and reward the bad ones up to 50% u will see the good ones already have left.

Why bother improving? Game forces u into a 50% status anyway.

The second they think about skilled MM in this game or in wot....I`m gone. And I won`t be the only one.

 

This post has been edited by the moderation team due to swearing. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RONIN]
[RONIN]
Beta Tester
2,554 posts
5,519 battles

Ok well smm could have 3 versions and each has a glaring problem;

 

1). Balancing each team by a value. This is where each player is allocated a value, and both teams have an equal value. Glaring problem? The better you are the worse your team will be. Guaranteed.

 

2). Having each team mirrored. This is where if you have a unicum cv, then the enemy does too. If you have a bot dd, so does the enemy. Glaring problem? Not only can you still have a crap team (just the enemy will have exactly the same), but the wait time is huge because you need to match each team exactly.

 

3). Leagues. This is where everyone on one team is of a certain quality, vs a team of the same quality.

The problem with this is simply wait time. Imagine you're a unicum. You want a game. Well you now need to wait for 23 other unicums. In addition you need to wait for 23 unicums who are at the right tier and have chosen the appropriate ships.

To put it into comparison, look at overwatch which puts you in a game with roughly equal people. The teams on overwatch don't have different tiers. They're much smaller teams. Nor do you pick your class until its put you in the game. Nor does it care if everyone picks support. All the MM needs to do therefore is find enough people who are roughly equal to you, and it has a much larger pool to draw from. Even though it has much less restraints, much less variables and a much larger pool, it will still frequently take 5 mins to find a game. So much so that overwatch puts you into a random skirmish while it waits to find you an actual game.

 

Even with leagues, you'd still get complaints about quality, because lots of people dont play consistently. I might do a 200k game. I'm sure you wouldnt mind having me on your team duting that one. Conversely I might do 18k. Im sure you wouldnt be quite as happy to have me then.

 

Also everyone is someone else's idiot. You might think that 47% guy is an idiot. Well you probably find that the 52% guy isnt as good as you'd like either. If you get the 60% guy then you're happy but he's unhappy because he thinks he's stuck with you.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×