Jump to content


How to fix MM once, and for all. WG READ ON!

Gobblers MMNeedsToChange

  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

MokeyLOG #21 Posted Feb 25 2016 - 01:17

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 17537 battles
  • 45
  • [FRAC] FRAC
  • Member since:
    02-25-2012
Honestly, if WG used WN8 and just tried to get the AVG WN8 as close to equal as possible on both teams during MM the problem would be solved. But that will never happen :(

Edited by MokeyLOG, Feb 25 2016 - 01:18.


AXSlS #22 Posted Feb 25 2016 - 04:37

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 8305 battles
  • 46
  • Member since:
    09-24-2015

wait you want a tier 5 player with 18k battles to be put in to battles with players with 5k battles and driving tier 8 heavies? 

 

I have now 8k battles and I like to keep 1 tank of each tier, I find low tier battles more fun and even as a new player ive never felt like it was always unicums clubbing away all day. 

 

plus if you are better then say 60% of the players, you should be able to face those worse players, not just always playing great players and getting wooped

 

and lastly, number of battles means little, they could have been playing for 5 years but casually so they are not that good or care to be. and also we see players with many games making worse choices then new players lol sooo....



DUKE_AUTY #23 Posted Feb 25 2016 - 15:21

    Captain

  • Players
  • 39294 battles
  • 1,780
  • Member since:
    07-11-2012

View PostMokeyLOG, on Feb 24 2016 - 16:17, said:

Honestly, if WG used WN8 and just tried to get the AVG WN8 as close to equal as possible on both teams during MM the problem would be solved. But that will never happen :(

 

WN8 is a flawed third party metric. 

 

So yes, never going to happen. 



Jake81499 #24 Posted Feb 27 2016 - 05:17

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 12016 battles
  • 125
  • [WYOCB] WYOCB
  • Member since:
    01-05-2013

View PostAXSlS, on Feb 25 2016 - 03:37, said:

wait you want a tier 5 player with 18k battles to be put in to battles with players with 5k battles and driving tier 8 heavies?

 

I have now 8k battles and I like to keep 1 tank of each tier, I find low tier battles more fun and even as a new player ive never felt like it was always unicums clubbing away all day.

 

plus if you are better then say 60% of the players, you should be able to face those worse players, not just always playing great players and getting wooped

 

and lastly, number of battles means little, they could have been playing for 5 years but casually so they are not that good or care to be. and also we see players with many games making worse choices then new players lol sooo....

 

I kinda agree about the low tiers. Max out a crew down there, set the tank up right and have some fun.

New_Scotlander #25 Posted Feb 27 2016 - 18:36

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 19811 battles
  • 50
  • [F__R] F__R
  • Member since:
    11-19-2012
KV-85 vs IS-3? why not my Pz.S35 vs a Tiger? makes sense. not like ill ALWAYS get run over or anything

MokeyLOG #26 Posted Feb 28 2016 - 19:36

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 17537 battles
  • 45
  • [FRAC] FRAC
  • Member since:
    02-25-2012

View PostDUKE_AUTY, on Feb 25 2016 - 14:21, said:

 

WN8 is a flawed third party metric. 

 

So yes, never going to happen. 

 

it could be a flawed third party metric, however "typically" and I use this lightly because there are exceptions, players with a higher WN8, normally 800+ seem to actually try harder. And yes they have their derp moments, but if you put an average on wn8 or even the in game stats and just try to balance the skill between all players, it could fair better.

 

I know a lot of people don't like WN8, but if it wasn't true, why do a lot of top clans have a minimum req. for joining, why do you get hated when your a tomato, it has to be good for something.

 

Hell they could use player standing to balance it out.



Phloyd113 #27 Posted Feb 28 2016 - 21:35

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 14967 battles
  • 957
  • Member since:
    07-22-2013

View PostCode__Dragon, on Feb 23 2016 - 21:11, said:

I am pretty sure WGing already said they would not do this.

 

Many have said that, so I'm not putting only you on the spot. But when? What year? How many [players were in the pool? How many tanks were in the Tech Tree? What were the parameters of team forming in the MatchMaker when this was rejected?

 

I have tried on several occasions to get the old answers to provide to me the parameters of their claims, but no one seems to understand that test benches made see changes merely due to higher traffic, and getting opinions outside of the dedicated Beta Testers that seem to gain more favor that we do.

 

Until we have those answer as to the specifics of previous rejections, we simply cannot just accept that to be the answer. The dynamics of a growing site is one which may make beta testing invalid, thus creating the need for a forum in the first place; to provide feedback even AFTER the game is released.

 

My point is that, if WG rejected the notion when there were only a couple hundred players, those tests are invalid today with tens of thousands, and need to be revisited.

 

Closing the door to that is closing the door to growth.



Fish_Pig #28 Posted Mar 01 2016 - 06:34

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 17367 battles
  • 26
  • [HORDE] HORDE
  • Member since:
    03-29-2014
Even though the game has a built in rating number called personal rating, Wargaming has said many many times that they will not implement a mmr/elo/skill (whatever you want to call it) queue system into the game.  The upside to a rating queue system would be better quality games to really test a players skill, since for instance only blues and purps would play against each other and not against tomotoes/potatoes/oranges.  The downside, and the reason Wargaming has given for not implementing a rating system, is that it would be too hard to make and implement, and it would increase game queue time substantially.

Jake81499 #29 Posted Mar 03 2016 - 18:27

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 12016 battles
  • 125
  • [WYOCB] WYOCB
  • Member since:
    01-05-2013

View PostMacsen1961, on Feb 23 2016 - 23:27, said:

 

at least a dozen times since I started playing...

 

as well as limit mm to eras, historic accuracy, no arty, etc

​A lot more than that from what Ive read. A new one every day.



Flarvin #30 Posted Mar 03 2016 - 20:40

    Major

  • Players
  • 54260 battles
  • 16,099
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View PostMokeyLOG, on Feb 24 2016 - 19:17, said:

Honestly, if WG used WN8 and just tried to get the AVG WN8 as close to equal as possible on both teams during MM the problem would be solved. But that will never happen :(

 

How is that going to fix 7 tier 10s on one team and 2 on the other?

 

All you are trying to do is balance skill between teams, which will reduce skill's influnance on who wins. It will not remove blowouts, or even significantly reduce them. 

 

It would also reward bots and bad players with more wins, which they do not deserve. 



Widowmaker789 #31 Posted Mar 04 2016 - 02:31

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15162 battles
  • 73
  • Member since:
    04-03-2014

I would happily wait a bit longer knowing that I would get a balanced game instead of quickly getting into a game where it is lopsided one way or the other.

 

As for driving people away, I know more people who have quit the game due to poor matchmaking than anything to do with waiting.

 

At the end of the day, Matchmaking has to be fixed. It is the single most important aspect of the game and it is broken. Losing or winning a game 14 to 3 or a similar way over and over is not enjoyable. I don't care what metric the developers use- skill, tier limiting, WN8, personal level, whatever, they need to do what their FAQ says: "The balancing system is often referred to as the Match Maker (MM) and is created to ensure an equal chance of both teams during random battles."  Individual players getting better is helpful, but a team of 15 needs to be on a similar level and fighting a team on a similar level for each team to have a roughly equal chance to win.

 



Dreadshells #32 Posted Mar 06 2016 - 16:46

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 52762 battles
  • 206
  • Member since:
    07-07-2012
You don't research before you come to a conclusion, do you........

Manimal__ #33 Posted Mar 07 2016 - 02:09

    Major

  • Players
  • 40472 battles
  • 3,585
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013

View PostMacsen1961, on Feb 23 2016 - 22:27, said:

 

at least a dozen times since I started playing...

 

as well as limit mm to eras, historic accuracy, no arty, etc

 

What? no arty? I've never seen any posts about arty.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users