Jump to content


Official 8.0 Matchmaker Discussion

match maker

  • Please log in to reply
1018 replies to this topic

davewing #41 Posted Oct 18 2012 - 15:00

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 33739 battles
  • 578
  • [K-ON] K-ON
  • Member since:
    07-21-2011
The MM still needs work and i hope the Dev's continue to work on it. Yes they have made things better but the player match up still needs work. I'm an average player, today i've played 8 matches, won 2 lost 6. My point is the 2 wins were close well fought matches and the 6 losses were blowouts with the enemy not lossing more then 5 tanks. How can they say the MM is fair when ppl say at the start of the match, we lose XVM says we only have a 20% to win. As a result you see ppl drowning them selves to aviod repair costs ( an increasing problem ). I have also
notice an increase in ghost shots, none damage hits, and lower damaging shots. So IMO the MM and game still needs much work.

Caitz #42 Posted Oct 18 2012 - 16:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 26578 battles
  • 4,054
  • Member since:
    08-10-2011
First of all, outstanding work on the new match-making system. It's simply outstanding, and has vastly improving the game. I wonder if you have considered a two tier spread for high and midde tier mediums. I'm not really suggesting it, as much as making a point of consideration.

dojochuck #43 Posted Oct 19 2012 - 05:23

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 28975 battles
  • 37
  • [AMPED] AMPED
  • Member since:
    04-10-2012
I don't know what you guys did, other than tightening the tier spread, but I have to say, the matchmaker appears to be completely broken from my perspective.  Now I was a pretty average player before. Although my efficiency is fairly low, I score in the upper half of my team in XP more often than not.  Now in the last week and a half alone, my win rates on my tier 7's (which I play the most) have dropped from 54% to 48%, and I am really not doing anything differently.  I just get loss after loss after loss, no matter whether I have a great game or not.  I'm getting about 1 win in 6 or 8 games.  Considering I am only one 15th of the team, and that I'm losing consistently even when I'm playing well, I can only believe that something else has changed.  I have heard that I'm not the only person having this problem either, although the others don't seem to be as frustrated as I am.

Anyone else having a similar experience?  I know, the first response will be "play better".  But when I lose no matter whether I get 0 kills or if I get top gun, play better is just not good enough.

husband #44 Posted Oct 19 2012 - 06:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 36792 battles
  • 3,650
  • Member since:
    07-01-2011

View Postdojochuck, on Oct 19 2012 - 05:23, said:

I don't know what you guys did, other than tightening the tier spread, but I have to say, the matchmaker appears to be completely broken from my perspective.  Now I was a pretty average player before. Although my efficiency is fairly low, I score in the upper half of my team in XP more often than not.  Now in the last week and a half alone, my win rates on my tier 7's (which I play the most) have dropped from 54% to 48%, and I am really not doing anything differently.  I just get loss after loss after loss, no matter whether I have a great game or not.  I'm getting about 1 win in 6 or 8 games.  Considering I am only one 15th of the team, and that I'm losing consistently even when I'm playing well, I can only believe that something else has changed.  I have heard that I'm not the only person having this problem either, although the others don't seem to be as frustrated as I am.

Anyone else having a similar experience?  I know, the first response will be "play better".  But when I lose no matter whether I get 0 kills or if I get top gun, play better is just not good enough.
for every team that is experiencing a loss, there is, probably, a team experiencing a win. probably.

Unker #45 Posted Oct 19 2012 - 13:34

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 4987 battles
  • 344
  • Member since:
    07-02-2011

View Postdojochuck, on Oct 19 2012 - 05:23, said:

I don't know what you guys did, other than tightening the tier spread, but I have to say, the matchmaker appears to be completely broken from my perspective.  Now I was a pretty average player before. Although my efficiency is fairly low, I score in the upper half of my team in XP more often than not.  Now in the last week and a half alone, my win rates on my tier 7's (which I play the most) have dropped from 54% to 48%, and I am really not doing anything differently.  I just get loss after loss after loss, no matter whether I have a great game or not.  I'm getting about 1 win in 6 or 8 games.  Considering I am only one 15th of the team, and that I'm losing consistently even when I'm playing well, I can only believe that something else has changed.  I have heard that I'm not the only person having this problem either, although the others don't seem to be as frustrated as I am.

Anyone else having a similar experience?  I know, the first response will be "play better".  But when I lose no matter whether I get 0 kills or if I get top gun, play better is just not good enough.

I've found that I'm doing worse with my "scouts" and better with my heavies since the MM change and in particular with 8.0.  I've been applying some of the things from the training academy videos and it has made a huge difference.  I think my struggles with my scouts has been that I have not figured out how to take advantage of they new physics.

I wouldn't necessarily say "play better", but you have acknowledged that the environment changed with the MM spread tightening, but you are not doing anything different.  Any change in the mix of tanks you are seeing requires an adjustment in how you play - you need to adapt.  I haven't yet with some of my tanks.

Don't forget that there is an equal number of winners and losers for each battle.  If the changes have made it more difficult for you to get wins, it has become easier for someone else.  The challenge is to figure out why.  :)

dojochuck #46 Posted Oct 19 2012 - 14:03

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 28975 battles
  • 37
  • [AMPED] AMPED
  • Member since:
    04-10-2012

View Posthusband, on Oct 19 2012 - 06:11, said:

for every team that is experiencing a loss, there is, probably, a team experiencing a win. probably.

Thanks, that's about as helpful as "play better".  See, there's a difference between coincidence and trend.  When my team is continually slaughtered like 3 - 15, over and over again, that's a trend.  Yes, the other team wins, but it's the other team 7 times out of 8 or so.  Am I expected to kill 10 tanks a game to get a 50% win rate?  If not, then the MM is doing something wrong.

husband #47 Posted Oct 19 2012 - 17:05

    Major

  • Players
  • 36792 battles
  • 3,650
  • Member since:
    07-01-2011

View Postdojochuck, on Oct 19 2012 - 14:03, said:

Thanks, that's about as helpful as "play better".  See, there's a difference between coincidence and trend.  When my team is continually slaughtered like 3 - 15, over and over again, that's a trend.  Yes, the other team wins, but it's the other team 7 times out of 8 or so.  Am I expected to kill 10 tanks a game to get a 50% win rate?  If not, then the MM is doing something wrong.

well if you think its a trend; then it cannot be matchmaker since MM doesn't stack against you ever.

What I notice and humbly accept is that the game is influenced often by the following
1) the team that has a larger number of  Lowe&KV5&SP&T34 tend to do worse (because many of these players only have XP up to Tier 6; not all but many)
2) the team that has more clan members in it tends to do a little better - since some (not all) of those clan members will have done more training
3) the team that more platoons has an edge (communication)
4) the team that has more experienced (6K+ games) tends to do better especially if they are support roles - Light tanks that survive, mediums that move and flank, TDs that shoot and move, heavies that don't advance alone, SPGs that continually re-position
5) the team that has several more experienced 8K+ players will have an equiptment advantage (stabilizer, rammer, vents) and murderous crew (100% crew, sixth sense,  repair etc) and know the weaknesses of your tanks and their own.


Honestly at 4000 battles you are probably missing a tactical element of one of the tiers-
for example often  Tier 4 light players do not realize they are scouts facing tier8s once they get to Tier 4 and continue to be stunned and ill-prepared for their new role; since in tier 1-3 everyone rushed and died and killed a few.
medium tanks tier 4 and higher flank with friends
heavy tanks 4 and higher - push with support
etc

so yes you are doing something wrong and it could be the following
- you are in a new tier tank that
1. crew is not 100%
2. new tank, stock
3. new tank elite but no complex equipment
4, new tank, new tactics but you haven't found them out ... well research the tank and forums
5. which tank are you on a losing team more often and surprised(disapointed) by the result ? post that with questions and you will get answers


The worst coincidences to happen and the biggest reasons for my losses (when it wasn't me playing badly) is when your team mates have less than 3000 games and don't even know the basic strategies on the maps and still play like they are Tier 1-3. Those players die prematurely and do not watch the training videos - this last tank academy one was exceptionally useful - but all 3 are awesome

In summary, manuever and push to preserve yourself and your teammates and kill the weaker tanks first.

Edited by husband, Oct 19 2012 - 17:09.


dojochuck #48 Posted Oct 19 2012 - 23:10

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 28975 battles
  • 37
  • [AMPED] AMPED
  • Member since:
    04-10-2012
I appreciate that very thoughtful input.  However, the reasoning behind my original comment is that such consistent losing as I am experiencing now cannot be attributed to either a random string of bad luck, or my own poor performance.  This has been occuring in my T20 and my T29.  Up until about a week and a half ago, I had a 54% win rate in each.  And now, 51% in the T29 and 47% in the T20.

I certainly don't think that "everyone is out to get me" or that MM is stacking against me personally.  I can only assume that the MM is over-weighting my tanks, or some other sort of miscalculation.  If you consider the simple statistics, even if I was AFK every game, my win rate should be better than the 10% or so that I've experienced this last week.  Far better.  One day of losers could be bad luck or an off day, but more than a week of this now has me losing what's left of my hair, and mind.

To more specifically answer your questions:
1. Crews are both 100% with 100% repair skill
2. Tanks are both elite, fully upgraded, except engine on T29.
3. No complex equipment.
4. Tactics worked fairly well for me before, and while I'm not the best player out there, I can't get a win now even with 2, 3, or 4 kills in a battle.
5. T29 and T20.  M4 Sherman to a lesser degree.  

I just want to point out that I posted my comment only in the hope that WG will take a look at improving their MM model.

Thanks again.

Black_Dog_blues #49 Posted Oct 19 2012 - 23:57

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 17550 battles
  • 678
  • Member since:
    09-16-2011

View Postdojochuck, on Oct 19 2012 - 14:03, said:

Thanks, that's about as helpful as "play better".  See, there's a difference between coincidence and trend.  When my team is continually slaughtered like 3 - 15, over and over again, that's a trend.  Yes, the other team wins, but it's the other team 7 times out of 8 or so.  Am I expected to kill 10 tanks a game to get a 50% win rate?  If not, then the MM is doing something wrong.

I think you hit the nail on the head ( trend ) and there are time cycles which should be avoided if possible by some players. For example, I'm an Australian player, and if I play between 6 pm and midnight Australian
eastern daytime, I'm in trouble. Just like you I have lot's of great games personally but the wining rate is horrible due to poor play of my team. I suspect that a lot of non English speaking players are on and it
has a great influence on the game as there is little communication. I'm not saying they are all bad players but you need at least some basic strategy communication going on or the team suffers.


Such is life

husband #50 Posted Oct 20 2012 - 00:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 36792 battles
  • 3,650
  • Member since:
    07-01-2011

View Postdojochuck, on Oct 19 2012 - 23:10, said:

I appreciate that very thoughtful input.  However, the reasoning behind my original comment is that such consistent losing as I am experiencing now cannot be attributed to either a random string of bad luck, or my own poor performance.  This has been occuring in my T20 and my T29.  Up until about a week and a half ago, I had a 54% win rate in each.  And now, 51% in the T29 and 47% in the T20.

I certainly don't think that "everyone is out to get me" or that MM is stacking against me personally.  I can only assume that the MM is over-weighting my tanks, or some other sort of miscalculation.  If you consider the simple statistics, even if I was AFK every game, my win rate should be better than the 10% or so that I've experienced this last week.  Far better.  One day of losers could be bad luck or an off day, but more than a week of this now has me losing what's left of my hair, and mind.

To more specifically answer your questions:
1. Crews are both 100% with 100% repair skill
2. Tanks are both elite, fully upgraded, except engine on T29.
3. No complex equipment.
4. Tactics worked fairly well for me before, and while I'm not the best player out there, I can't get a win now even with 2, 3, or 4 kills in a battle.
5. T29 and T20.  M4 Sherman to a lesser degree.  

I just want to point out that I posted my comment only in the hope that WG will take a look at improving their MM model.

Thanks again.

That is useful information that it is 2 specific tanks you are experiencing this with.
I have 28 vehicles in my garage so I thought it was across the board.

The main thing that will make a BIG difference to your win rate immediately is not having 6th sense. Repair is crucial but you should spend the gold and convert your Commander to 6th sense at the next re-train sale (100g instead of 200g)

There is no good reason not to have complex eqpt on your Tier 7s.
On my T29 I had a 56% win rate at the end. I did have gun rammer, laying drive and optics  
for example - you vs me (with 6th sense and complex)

I see you 35-40 m before you see me.
I shoot before you even know I am there. because of the laying drive and my gunners dead eye- I'll hit you for 200 and an increased chance of a critical

If am within your spotting range - I will know when you see me and start reversing back out of range and shoot again before your recticle has closed. - another 200 off you.

if we then start engaging - unless you have someone else spotting me; I'll keep hitting you outside your view range 7 shots for every 6 of yours because my gun rammer and laying drive mean I have more shells in the chamber with closed recticle than you have.

I can see 10% farther, shoot 10% faster and be 10% more accurate and do 5% more criticals - and so can every other experienced Tier 7 tank.

If you can't afford to have complex equipment at tier 6 upwards, you are at a disadvantage to you opponents who have more than 6000 battles and do have the necessaries. If you are top tiered without equipment you end up putting your team at a 10% disadvantage too :(

a solution is
1) buy a T14 without crew 9 (you can use your T29 at no penalty) and make money to buy the equipment at the next sale
2) buy a premium medium as well for to increase your T20 crew skills too, and buy equipment
3) Get XVM installed - you will notice that many (not all) T8 premiums like Lowe, KV5, SP and T34 are even less experienced than you and cannot be relied upon to carry their MM weight
4) play more varieties of tanks ,your experienced opponents like me already know the weakspots and shortcomings of most tanks on the field
5) watch the 3 tank academy videos this weekend

Edited by husband, Oct 20 2012 - 00:32.


ranger275c #51 Posted Oct 21 2012 - 01:54

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 25145 battles
  • 57
  • [OWS] OWS
  • Member since:
    07-08-2011
I dont know what you DEVs are doing to the game but you really need to think about what your doing... Did you think that it would be funny messing up the game or what? So many people in game are complaining about the I use to kill that tank in 2 shots and now it takes 6. Or how about I rammed them before and killed them now I do no damage.... Next time you want to improve the game pull your heads out of the ink and think....

fablkak #52 Posted Oct 21 2012 - 04:04

    Captain

  • Players
  • 32252 battles
  • 1,259
  • Member since:
    01-09-2011
I'm sorry to say this but WG your MM is still as broken as ever.

Just look at this

Team one:
3 tier X
3 tier IX
2 tier 8
1 tier v scout
6 arty

Team two:
6 tier X
2 tier IX
1 tier v scout
6 arty.

Posted Image

Edited by fablkak, Oct 21 2012 - 04:05.


Feargor #53 Posted Oct 21 2012 - 06:16

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 1606 battles
  • 26
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011
One individual's win/loss rate does not indicate a problem with the MM, and there's really no way to adjust the MM to change your individual W/L rate unless you somehow code it to actively stack the teams in some manner in order to ensure a player a win . . which would just make the problem worse, not better.

I have had a lot more strings of losing teams under the new MM as well, but the real issue is not that the MM needs changed somehow, but that the increased balance in the rounds has exposed a lot of poor players who used to either be able to hide behind having the biggest tank in the round where they could play poorly and still beat up a bunch of helpless cannon-fodder, or who used to be one of those cannon-fodders most rounds so that their poor play was not evident since it made no difference in the round anyway.  I have been dragged down round after round by teams that can't drive, can't shoot, don't know the terrain and how to use it, and DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO THEUR MINIMAPS!!!  I think it has caused my own level of play to suffer somewhat as I often find myself trying to do too much or pushing too much because I can tell fairly quickly once the round starts (I don't have XVM and don't ever intend to get it) that the rest of my team is not going to do squat.  There's no amount of tampering with the MM that will ever fix this.  The fact is that the current matchmaking is the best solution to the problem since it will, over time, force people to learn how to play better.

Of course, that all being said, just because the final score on a round looks like a blow-out, that does not automatically mean that one team played immensly better than the other team.  It is easy for even a match that is, initially, well-played by both teams to snowball out of control for one team as they lose a tank first, which lets the other team gang up on another tank . . which leaves more enemies to swarm the next tank . . until the disparity in numbers becomes too great for the remaining team members to do anything about it.  Too often, one side getting wiped out while the other side only loses a few tanks is used here on the forums as evidence of bad play or a problem with the MM, but it is really just the nature of warfare, especially as presented by WoT.  In many cases, it IS because the team played very poorly, or because the MM stacked a team, but just not an automatic indicator of such as it is so often used here on the forums.

Really, the only serious issue I still see with the MM is the continued inability to balance vehicle types in a round.  Still get too many rounds where there is a large amount of arty (and I am talking about the low and middle tiers, not even bringing the insanity of the top-tier arty balance into the discussion here), one side has 9 - 10 TDs (or even more on occasion), or one side has ALL the Heavies in the round.  For all that arty people complain at the mention of a hard-cap on the number of arty in any given round (I play arty too, and it's a lot of fun . . but just because it is fun for me doesn't mean it should be allowed to wreck the game so that I can short-sightedly protect my current fun.), there REALLY needs to be a limit on how many arty can be in a round (although I favor the addition of more game modes or control over the game modes/types that a player wants to play in so that games with a higher arty cap could still be an option).  There also needs to be a limit on how many TDs are in a round, because the round where one team is all TDs (except for a few arty, of course.  yes, I have seen a number of rounds like that.) become camp-fests where the non-TD team is forced into immobility by the shear number of enemy TDs . . but mobility is supposed to be the main balancing factor between tanks and TDs (followed closely by either armor differential or lack of traverse).  Really, just having an MM that would put the same number of whatever type (heavy, medium, light, TD, arty) on both teams would fix most of this issue even without any kind of hard-capping on any specific type.

Nep57 #54 Posted Oct 23 2012 - 03:19

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 27807 battles
  • 146
  • Member since:
    12-31-2011

View PostFeargor, on Oct 21 2012 - 06:16, said:

One individual's win/loss rate does not indicate a problem with the MM, and there's really no way to adjust the MM to change your individual W/L rate unless you somehow code it to actively stack the teams in some manner in order to ensure a player a win . . which would just make the problem worse, not better.

I have had a lot more strings of losing teams under the new MM as well, but the real issue is not that the MM needs changed somehow, but that the increased balance in the rounds has exposed a lot of poor players who used to either be able to hide behind having the biggest tank in the round where they could play poorly and still beat up a bunch of helpless cannon-fodder, or who used to be one of those cannon-fodders most rounds so that their poor play was not evident since it made no difference in the round anyway.  I have been dragged down round after round by teams that can't drive, can't shoot, don't know the terrain and how to use it, and DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO THEUR MINIMAPS!!!  I think it has caused my own level of play to suffer somewhat as I often find myself trying to do too much or pushing too much because I can tell fairly quickly once the round starts (I don't have XVM and don't ever intend to get it) that the rest of my team is not going to do squat.  There's no amount of tampering with the MM that will ever fix this.  The fact is that the current matchmaking is the best solution to the problem since it will, over time, force people to learn how to play better.

Of course, that all being said, just because the final score on a round looks like a blow-out, that does not automatically mean that one team played immensly better than the other team.  It is easy for even a match that is, initially, well-played by both teams to snowball out of control for one team as they lose a tank first, which lets the other team gang up on another tank . . which leaves more enemies to swarm the next tank . . until the disparity in numbers becomes too great for the remaining team members to do anything about it.  Too often, one side getting wiped out while the other side only loses a few tanks is used here on the forums as evidence of bad play or a problem with the MM, but it is really just the nature of warfare, especially as presented by WoT.  In many cases, it IS because the team played very poorly, or because the MM stacked a team, but just not an automatic indicator of such as it is so often used here on the forums.

Really, the only serious issue I still see with the MM is the continued inability to balance vehicle types in a round.  Still get too many rounds where there is a large amount of arty (and I am talking about the low and middle tiers, not even bringing the insanity of the top-tier arty balance into the discussion here), one side has 9 - 10 TDs (or even more on occasion), or one side has ALL the Heavies in the round.  For all that arty people complain at the mention of a hard-cap on the number of arty in any given round (I play arty too, and it's a lot of fun . . but just because it is fun for me doesn't mean it should be allowed to wreck the game so that I can short-sightedly protect my current fun.), there REALLY needs to be a limit on how many arty can be in a round (although I favor the addition of more game modes or control over the game modes/types that a player wants to play in so that games with a higher arty cap could still be an option).  There also needs to be a limit on how many TDs are in a round, because the round where one team is all TDs (except for a few arty, of course.  yes, I have seen a number of rounds like that.) become camp-fests where the non-TD team is forced into immobility by the shear number of enemy TDs . . but mobility is supposed to be the main balancing factor between tanks and TDs (followed closely by either armor differential or lack of traverse).  Really, just having an MM that would put the same number of whatever type (heavy, medium, light, TD, arty) on both teams would fix most of this issue even without any kind of hard-capping on any specific type.

The hell you say we did a test  we took one player from our clan with a e-100 and then another player with a e-100 both all upgraded player 1 has a 45% win rate  player 2 has a 59 % win rate.
They sat and at there affective range's  they where told where to shoot 4 round each in the same spots just different areas the 45% player fired first in the under belly he bounce all 3 rounds out of the 4.
The 59% then fired the same 4 rounds at the same spots and he ripped the other e-100 apart we did this with 4 tier 10's the e-100,t110e5, is-7, and the is-4 the same test with the same 2 players and the same result so anyone that tells you win rates doesn't matter a fools.
If you do the same test you'll get the same result so mm needs to look into this because they are making match's unfair by putting 45 to 48 % players on 1 side then puttung 48 to 60 % on the others they never going to be eqaul match's in this game it they don't and it's making some players want to go to other games because of it..

Edited by Nepwararrow, Oct 23 2012 - 03:22.


Ezz #55 Posted Oct 23 2012 - 04:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 13837 battles
  • 6,131
  • Member since:
    08-20-2011

View PostNepwararrow, on Oct 23 2012 - 03:19, said:

the same test with the same 2 players and the same result so anyone that tells you win rates doesn't matter a fools.
I trust the replays are up somewhere. Can you link them please.

shbs #56 Posted Oct 23 2012 - 06:03

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 13499 battles
  • 171
  • Member since:
    06-03-2012

View PostEzz, on Oct 23 2012 - 04:58, said:

I trust the replays are up somewhere. Can you link them please.

^this - agreed

i would like to see the marks on the tanks, showing where the rounds actually hit.

Might be able to learn something from this - good test

IRCrimson #57 Posted Oct 23 2012 - 08:36

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 9619 battles
  • 64
  • [AP-OC] AP-OC
  • Member since:
    12-22-2011
People complain about too many artillery but no one seems to mention too many heavies. When more than 1/2 of each team is heavies, which seems to happen overwhelmingly at, you guessed it, TIER 8, there gets to be a point where there's no point to anything else. Mediums? Yea, you're not flanking anything. By tier 8 they know exactly what they're doing and it's gangland thuggery. Lights? Well at least you're mobile. It just becomes a thug match to see who can out hulk the other team faster. I understand facing tier 8 tanks occasionally due to the matchmaker but the number of matches I see VS stacked decks of Tier 8 heavies makes me want to garage 1/3 of my matches. If so many people have those premiums the MM needs to start making all premium matches to thin out their numbers. Playing a low tier medium is no fun when the lineup reads Lowe, Lowe, Type 59, KV-5, T34, T34, JgTig8.8... At that tier I can't even reliably track these tanks, and as soon as cover is blown sniped to death. Mediums don't have the speed of ELC AMXs or T-50-2s. We can't just weave between shells and go at their rear line. Every other match is VS these Tier 8 mongolesque hordes of heavies. If that many people play them sequestor them, they're too good.
...
OK, so to make up for the 7 or 8 heavies per side every match last night I get a match with only four heavies... three of the four on the other team. WTF is going on in that matchmaking code?

Edited by IRCrimson, Oct 24 2012 - 07:05.


KilljoyCutter #58 Posted Oct 25 2012 - 06:04

    Major

  • Players
  • 8469 battles
  • 26,062
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011
Matchmaker still isn't able to account for trends, so you end up bottom-tier over and over and over in certain tanks or on certain nights.

Caine_McMaster #59 Posted Oct 25 2012 - 09:18

    Private

  • Players
  • 9985 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    05-18-2011
Matchmaker worse then ever. First match tonight was a 7 man team followed by a match with 13 arty.....which only leaves me wondering WTF and why is this issue still not fixed.

Super_Silver #60 Posted Oct 25 2012 - 09:46

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 803 battles
  • 54
  • Member since:
    05-05-2012

View PostUnker, on Oct 16 2012 - 14:05, said:

Good post even if I disagree.   :Smile-hiding:

While I agree that the amount of arty is high in top tier games, I really disagree with putting a hard cap on arty.  There needs to be a way to either get less people playing arty at those levels or getting more of other tanks playing.  The two best features of the random battles are the speed in which you get into a game and the variety of scenarios you encounter in a day.  You can get the same map twice in a row and have to play it differently based on the makeup of your team and the opposing team.  A hard cap will take both of these away.  Games rarely go the full length of time - Mine probably average about 5 mins (full game time, not just my survival).  For everyone claiming that a 2 minute wait time is acceptable for a random battle, that means spending 1/3 of your game time staring a the screen waiting for the game to start.  Add the 30 second timer and you are at almost 40% of your play time doing nothing.  If I want that, I would play in tank companies where I could choose my teammates.

A hard cap would also mean that those slots would be fixed for every battle.  Based on the number of battles played in tanks elegible for battle tier 12, an average of 6.2 per 30 are arty.   A cap of 3 would mean that not only would you ALWAYS have 3 arty per team, but there would not be enough arty slots to meet the demand.  Think of when the Playstation 2 came out and there was a shortage (The store by me got 5 on release day and there was a line of over 100 camping for them) - or if you are older, remember when the government put a price cap on gas prices and lines for gas were going around the block?  I agree with WG that if people want to play arty, they should be allowed to.  There are other ways to change the player mix.  The trick is to do it without screwing up the mid tier mix which is working so well.

As far as distribution, it would be nice to have a more even distribution, the only way it can happen is the make sure the distribution of players at each tier is the same at all times.  How would you like it if you go to battle in your favorite tank and you get a message - "Sorry, that tier is full.  Please choose a different tank"

Something that checks how many battles you have been in at each position - a completely new table with more than a million records that would need to be referenced at least 30 times for each battle created.  That would result in extremely long wait times for everyone.  Right now, even being the low tier is a good fight and if you have been looking at the new after battle details, the xp potential for the lower tiers is incredible.  2-3 good shots with my T1HT against a tier 7 enemy will get me more xp than 3-4 kills against tier 3.  I like being the big gun, but right now being the little guy is more profitable.



Only arty players would have to wait. So for the cowardly backstabbers who like to play ARTILLERY.... "Care Factor Zero" Waiting 3 minutes for a game would answer your first question concerning "How do we get less people playing arty?"





Also tagged with match maker

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users