Jump to content
Sehales

Matchmaker Improvements

20 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[WG-EU]
WG Staff, Alpha Tester
3,041 posts
947 battles

Starting with 0.7.4, the matchmaker is trying to form mirrored teams in regards to tier and ship classes. In case the waiting time exceed three minutes (e.g. during night time with less players), it will fall back to the old matchmaking process.

What do you think about this change? Leave your feedback here!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
65 posts

Matchmaking I think that needs to check other thinks than just Tiers.

Also leave T10 play alone. They are good, they made it, why killing T8, only to laugh at it?

There are so many T10 this days, it isn't like the open Beta period.

Also, if you only match tiers, then what about a guy that just bought his ship and it is all stock with bad captain.? He would have to compete with same tier AND 2 tiers above?.

Just some thoughts. I know Vladimir is trying hard...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ALYEN]
Players
558 posts
2,090 battles

I wonder how you are going to test MM on a notoriously player starved public test ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
3,546 posts
6,375 battles
10 minutes ago, Hugh_Ruka said:

I wonder how you are going to test MM on a notoriously player starved public test ...

Well if you bothered to read what's changed you'd see how

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ALYEN]
Players
558 posts
2,090 battles
Just now, wilkatis_LV said:

Well if you bothered to read what's changed you'd see how

Believe me I did ... they are making the wrong changes to the MM ... There should be broader tier spread for DDs, less for cruisers and middle for BBs (like 3 tiers for DDs, 1 tier for cruisers and 2 tiers for BBs).

 

Still no consideration for Radar, still no consideration for DD concealment etc .... at high tiers, this kills the game quite a lot since the wrong MM can screw you no matter how much you try ...

 

I am just wondering how the evaluation will work since public test is not really much of a test in some aspects, especially when large player numbers a large tier/class pool is required ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
3,546 posts
6,375 battles
4 minutes ago, Hugh_Ruka said:

they are making the wrong changes to the MM

Currently there are 2 kinds of ships - "top tier" and "not top tier".

 

Lets say it's tier 10 game. Tier 10 ship count won't differ by more than 1. So then, lets say, team A has 4 tier 10 ships. That means team B will have 3 / 4 / 5 of them. So far so good, right? Now we get to the "not top tier" - MM doesn't care if you are 8 or 9, you are both seen as equal. That means that one team can get full of 8s while the other one gets full of 9s

 

As it stands game of 4x t10 + 8x t8 fighting vs 5x t10 + 7x t9 would be a legit "nothing wrong with this" MM

 

 

What they are changing it is making the bottom-er tiers count actually balancing stuff between teams. Tell me again, they are doing what "wrong" with it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ALYEN]
Players
558 posts
2,090 battles
28 minutes ago, wilkatis_LV said:

Currently there are 2 kinds of ships - "top tier" and "not top tier".

 

Lets say it's tier 10 game. Tier 10 ship count won't differ by more than 1. So then, lets say, team A has 4 tier 10 ships. That means team B will have 3 / 4 / 5 of them. So far so good, right? Now we get to the "not top tier" - MM doesn't care if you are 8 or 9, you are both seen as equal. That means that one team can get full of 8s while the other one gets full of 9s

 

As it stands game of 4x t10 + 8x t8 fighting vs 5x t10 + 7x t9 would be a legit "nothing wrong with this" MM

 

 

What they are changing it is making the bottom-er tiers count actually balancing stuff between teams. Tell me again, they are doing what "wrong" with it?

How does this translate into the lower tiers ? Not at all since the chart on the page only talks about tiers 8+ ... It's WGs fault that they created major balancing points at some tiers yet they fail to account for them in matchmaking ...

 

You see it's not only about the tier but also about ship capabilities (cruiser heal, concealment module, radar f.e.). So tiers are not actually really relevant in the MM ... It's more the ship role and capabilities that should be counted (f.e. Khaba is not really a DD, so considering it as a DD for the purpose of MM is a mistake and there are more ships like that,  another issue are tier 8 CVs in tier 10 games ...).

 

Basically the top tier MM will take longer since you can Q for up to 3 minutes until the behavior for you changes. The games will not be more balanced ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
3,546 posts
6,375 battles
2 hours ago, Hugh_Ruka said:

How does this translate into the lower tiers ? Not at all since the chart on the page only talks about tiers 8+

Literally exact same as previously:

 

Spoiler

Lets say it's tier 7 game. Tier 7 ship count won't differ by more than 1. So then, lets say, team A has 4 tier 7 ships. That means team B will have 3 / 4 / 5 of them. So far so good, right? Now we get to the "not top tier" - MM doesn't care if you are 5 or 6, you are both seen as equal. That means that one team can get full of 5s while the other one gets full of 6s

 

As it stands game of 4x t7 + 8x t5 fighting vs 5x t7 + 7x t6 would be a legit "nothing wrong with this" MM

 

Was it that hard to figure out? :Smile_teethhappy:

 

Tiers 2 through 4 it's already working like that because they have only +/-1 tier spread (a.k.a. the "not top tier" part doesn't split into multiple tiers)

And since tier 1 can meet only tier 1 it's completely unaffected by any MM changes that aren't made to tier 1 specifically

 

In other words this affects 6 out of the 10 tiers we have (5 through 9 directly and then 10 because they will meet those "not top tier" ships), and I'm pretty sure that would include far far larger amount of player base than tiers 1 through 4.

 

Also I find it kind-of funny that it affects the zone where currently 87.3% of games you've played are, and unless you plan to go on a tier 4 or lower sealclubbing rampage that % will just keep growing :Smile_trollface:

 

2 hours ago, Hugh_Ruka said:

cruiser heal

is a balancing factor, one of many. if cruiser receives this it will be lacking in some other area compared to a cruiser which doesn't get it

 

2 hours ago, Hugh_Ruka said:

concealment module

Purely tier based. You are tier 8 or higher? you can mount it, and it's your own fault if you were dumb enough not to use it (or if you preferred the rudder shift mod instead on ships that can mount it)

 

2 hours ago, Hugh_Ruka said:

radar

is the only thing out of everything you've mentioned that should actually be balanced due to how ridiculously high snowballing impact it can have. Then again, just because a potato in his range build Missouri has a radar doesn't exactly make up for the other team getting a CB setup DesMemes

 

2 hours ago, Hugh_Ruka said:

It's more the ship role and capabilities that should be counted

It's already done. A DD will require +/-1 DD in enemy team. same for BBs. And especially with mirrored CVs. Only CAs are free to go to up to 2 more on one side. That's exactly as specific as it needs to be.

 

2 hours ago, Hugh_Ruka said:

another issue are tier 8 CVs in tier 10 games ...

git gud :Smile_trollface:

 

2 hours ago, Hugh_Ruka said:

Basically the top tier MM will take longer since you can Q for up to 3 minutes until the behavior for you changes. The games will not be more balanced ...

How thick are you to fail to understand?

 

Instead of

  • team A getting 2x t10 1x t9 and 4x t8
  • team B getting 2x t10 and 5x t9

we will have

  • team A getting 2x t10 3x t9 and 2x t8
  • team B getting 2x t10 3x t9 and 2x t8

 

Oh look, same ships, same count, just spread through teams more evenly?! HERESY! DARK MAGIC! IMPOSSIBLE! QUEUE TIMES WILL BE 50 MILLION TIMES LONGER NOW

 

Finally got it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ALYEN]
Players
558 posts
2,090 battles
7 hours ago, wilkatis_LV said:

Literally exact same as previously:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Lets say it's tier 7 game. Tier 7 ship count won't differ by more than 1. So then, lets say, team A has 4 tier 7 ships. That means team B will have 3 / 4 / 5 of them. So far so good, right? Now we get to the "not top tier" - MM doesn't care if you are 5 or 6, you are both seen as equal. That means that one team can get full of 5s while the other one gets full of 6s

 

As it stands game of 4x t7 + 8x t5 fighting vs 5x t7 + 7x t6 would be a legit "nothing wrong with this" MM

 

Was it that hard to figure out? :Smile_teethhappy:

 

Tiers 2 through 4 it's already working like that because they have only +/-1 tier spread (a.k.a. the "not top tier" part doesn't split into multiple tiers)

And since tier 1 can meet only tier 1 it's completely unaffected by any MM changes that aren't made to tier 1 specifically

 

In other words this affects 6 out of the 10 tiers we have (5 through 9 directly and then 10 because they will meet those "not top tier" ships), and I'm pretty sure that would include far far larger amount of player base than tiers 1 through 4.

 

Also I find it kind-of funny that it affects the zone where currently 87.3% of games you've played are, and unless you plan to go on a tier 4 or lower sealclubbing rampage that % will just keep growing :Smile_trollface:

 

is a balancing factor, one of many. if cruiser receives this it will be lacking in some other area compared to a cruiser which doesn't get it

 

Purely tier based. You are tier 8 or higher? you can mount it, and it's your own fault if you were dumb enough not to use it (or if you preferred the rudder shift mod instead on ships that can mount it)

 

is the only thing out of everything you've mentioned that should actually be balanced due to how ridiculously high snowballing impact it can have. Then again, just because a potato in his range build Missouri has a radar doesn't exactly make up for the other team getting a CB setup DesMemes

 

It's already done. A DD will require +/-1 DD in enemy team. same for BBs. And especially with mirrored CVs. Only CAs are free to go to up to 2 more on one side. That's exactly as specific as it needs to be.

 

git gud :Smile_trollface:

 

How thick are you to fail to understand?

 

Instead of

  • team A getting 2x t10 1x t9 and 4x t8
  • team B getting 2x t10 and 5x t9

we will have

  • team A getting 2x t10 3x t9 and 2x t8
  • team B getting 2x t10 3x t9 and 2x t8

 

Oh look, same ships, same count, just spread through teams more evenly?! HERESY! DARK MAGIC! IMPOSSIBLE! QUEUE TIMES WILL BE 50 MILLION TIMES LONGER NOW

 

Finally got it?

 

Why do I have the impression that you are talking about something else ? Well whatever ... let's agree that we disagree :-)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
3,546 posts
6,375 battles
4 hours ago, Hugh_Ruka said:

Why do I have the impression that you are talking about something else ? Well whatever ... let's agree that we disagree :-)

I'm talking about what they changed in MM for this test, what you are talking about I have no idea. As I said, it's all in the patch notes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ALYEN]
Players
558 posts
2,090 battles
29 minutes ago, wilkatis_LV said:

I'm talking about what they changed in MM for this test, what you are talking about I have no idea. As I said, it's all in the patch notes

I am talking about why it will not help ... I can read WHAT they changed, but their intention and reasoning seems not quite up there ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
65 posts

One day I saw 2 x Atlantas at same team, while our team have had one myoko and one schors?

Those 2 Atlanta's were not in a division, so it would have been good to split the Atlantas in between teams.

So you have one slow reloader Myoko versus 2 x Atlantas.

If you have spllited the Atlantas it would have been nicer ,more fair  MM

Just Tiering is not fair MM.

Also T10's can play alone. Without 9's . Like the T1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
3,546 posts
6,375 battles
22 minutes ago, HelldiverGr said:

One day I saw 2 x Atlantas at same team, while our team have had one myoko and one schors?

2x t7 cruiser vs 2x t7 cruiser

 

Radars are not balanced between teams, and I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for them to get balanced between them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
65 posts
18 minutes ago, wilkatis_LV said:

2x t7 cruiser vs 2x t7 cruiser

 

Radars are not balanced between teams, and I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for them to get balanced between them

Obviously not only the radars in this situation but 2 x fire spamming Atlantas...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
3,546 posts
6,375 battles
2 minutes ago, HelldiverGr said:

Obviously not only the radars in this situation but 2 x fire spamming Atlantas...

So?

Slow shells, high & obvious arcs, short range, low caliber shells that do barely any dmg (if they manage to pen you in the 1st place) and that have to land a ton of them for a single fire (on average Atlanta needs 29 HE hits on a t7 ship to start 1 fire)

Now Myoko - much tankier cruiser, with almost 50% extra range, faster (easier to land) shells that definitely have enough HE pen for pretty much everything (well, maybe not a couple of t9 BB decks), higher dmg per hit and you need just 8 shells on average to set a fire on a t7 ship.

 

 

It's not the ship, it's the potato behind it that matters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
65 posts

I cannot disagree with you in the way you put it...

But this only IF the Myoko see the Atlanta.

You know it, you ve been there. You get burned without having the opportunity to spot them, they fire long curved shots behind islands. Many shots.

Anyway my conversation had to do with at least splitting the Atlantas instead of having them in same team.

And yes they might not ever hit the Myoko, but they will play their part by spotting DDs or setting on fire unaware BBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PUPSI]
Players
69 posts
3,278 battles

I guess that MM issue with radar ships is because of ships that have radar at disposal but not using them as they have to give up on something more important to them.

 

RN T8+, vast majority is using smoke so can they be really considered as radar ships?

On the other side for example, what would you gave up on upon Des Moines or Moskva not to have radar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
65 posts

Never said to remove radars or anything, I am just saying 2 x Atlantas waiting for match. DO NOT put them in same team. 2 Belfasts waiting for match, do not put them in same team. you can't have 2 Belfasts in one side and 2 myoko at the other. (Well I know you can cause this is what is happening atm).

And two stock Myokos for example? No way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
251 posts
10,717 battles

I don't like the idea of perfectly mirrored teams in Random matches. It makes sense in competitive modes, but I like some variability in Random matches. The MM could be improved by preventing players from being bottom tier constantly, but otherwise being more flexible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[3STG]
Players
322 posts
9,329 battles
6 hours ago, 300ConfirmedKills said:

The MM could be improved by preventing players from being bottom tier constantly, but otherwise being more flexible.

It should be that way already. IIRC it should be that after four games you will not be bottom tier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×