Jump to content


Yet another MM thread

MM Matchmaking Skill 3-5-7

  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

TitanBic #1 Posted Jun 02 2016 - 19:32

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 4469 battles
  • 24
  • Member since:
    11-20-2015

So I just caught wind of the potential change to MM that was briefly mentioned at the end of the 9.15 news update. They mentioned a 3-5-7 MM system, and I can't help but feel this is not such a good idea. In their words:


"Unlike the existing matchmaking system that depends on the number of players in line for battle on the server, the new system will instead focus on the equality of opposing teams in terms of tier and vehicle type. The current plan is to create battles using the "3-5-7 principle," with three maximum-tier tanks, five mid-tier tanks, and seven minimum-tier tanks for the battle."


There are several core complaints that are frequently levied against the match making system in this game. The first one I commonly hear voiced is that the way the game is designed currently, with +2/-2 MM is unfair for the bottom tiers, usually followed by the request for something along the lines of switching to a two tier spread. So for a tier 6 tank it would be placed in game with a spread of either 5-6 or 6-7, but never 5-6-7. The second core complaint I hear, and the most modest and reasonable of them, is that there is to little concern placed by MM on the balancing of tank class/tier combinations. Such as one team getting 8 heavies and the other getting 4, or one team having 4 top tier heavies and the other having 4 bottom tier heavies, or some combination of both problems, creating a rather large imbalance. The last complaint that is frequently voiced is an appeal for skill based MM, mostly in response to one team having multiple 60%-64% WR players vs. a bunch of sub 50% WR players. All three of these issues and solutions have their own merits, and need to have some honest consideration. 


First off, considering the three common complaints about MM, I don't see how having a 3-5-7 MM, as WG spoke of, would address any of the three. MM already tries to balance tiers, albeit poorly at times, and this proposed system doesn't seem to do anything to address this. For the players sick of spending 33%+ of their games at bottom tier tanks, they will instead be spending even more of their time as bottom tier tanks, so obviously this just makes their situation worse. As for the players who want skill based MM, this doesn't take that into consideration in anyway, so, yet again, it doesn't help them either. What's the point of this then? It will absolutely change the gameplay, for the better or worst I cannot say, but it still doesn't address any of the issues the player base has brought up. 


WG obviously needs to strike a balance between the speed of MM in creating games, because nobody wants to spend 10min in queue, but it's obvious a lot of players are not happy with the current system and this isn't going to address any of the core complaints while simultaneously causing queue time to go up (I don't see how I couldn't...)


I think there is a issue with WG's underlying game design principle that leads them to purpose fixes like this that won't actually fix anything, this is something I would like to address here. I saw an interview with one of the devs from a long time ago, Serb I think, where they were discussing skill based MM, and he made a statement that I would like to believe isn't true, but says a lot about why the system is set up as it is. He said that players don't like balanced games, but rather, they would prefer to play 10 games where they rolfstomp the other team and fell like super-badasses, followed by 10 games where they're on the receiving end of the same thing. It's this believe, I believe, that justifies the -2/+2 MM of today, and the old MM that allowed for you take your tier 5 up against tier 8s regularly, I mean, eventually you'll get to be in the t8 stopping that cannon fodder into the ground. It's why they oppose any form of skill based MM. It's why +/-25% RNG makes sense to them. So here is the important question, was Serb right? I won't pretend I know what the majority of the player base wants, but I know what I want. I think it's a really important question to be asked, and now, with a large upcoming global rebalanced on the way (supposedly), is the time to ask it. 


Personally, I find the competitive PVP games I most enjoy are the games that provide a good balance of variety, while simultaneously keeping a relatively level playing field. This is, of course, diametrically opposed to what WG has based their decisions and game balance on so far. So I present this question to the player base of WoT, what do you prefer?Would you rather be on equal footing with your opponent, be able to bounce the occasional shell from an equal tiered opponent, to have to know and aim for weak points on heavily armored opponents? Placed against players of a similar skill level, and recieving a consistent challenge? Or do you play for the occasional game where you're in an roving impenetrable mobile fortress of death, stomping puny tanks, and noobies alike, into the ground, feeling like a major [edited]? Along with being on the often/occasional receiving end of those roving, impenetrable, mobile fortress' of death?
I know it's unlikely that WG will ever implement a skill based MM system, as not only do they believe that players prefer the cycle of pwn and be pwn'd, but they also believe players are too dumb to know what they want. Still, I can't hurt to put our opinions out there on the off occasion that we're heard for once. 


So, continue the cycle of own and be owned?
Or switch to skill based MM and more balanced game design?


If you would prefer skill based MM, would you rather have a system where the overall skill of players is balanced for each team (something like trying to keep the average win8 of each team and close to equal as possible)(this has the obvious detractor of 'punishing' high skill players by matching them with worse players to keep the balance and 'rewarding' lower skill players by matching them with higher skill players, but would keep the overall chance to win for each team close and ensure more consistently challenging games)?


Or would you rather a ladder like system, where high skill players are pooled together and matched exclusively other high skill players? (this has the obvious detractor of creating much longer queue times for very skilled players)


I personally think the best solution would be to create a sort of ranked ladder/skill based solo-queue, sort of like how LoL does theirs. (sorry to bring that terrible game into it, but it's a decent system, of course it's not without flaws, from a highly profitable and successful game). This would give players the option of opting into ranked skill-based MM when they want to play seriously, but still leave the random queue for when they just want to get into a game fast to play for fun. Even if it was only enabled for high/T10 tanks, it would be of great appeal to players like me. 
PS. Sorry for creating yet another MM thread, but I'd really like to know what people think about this, and I think WG should take some time and do some objective research to find out what players actually want rather then just assume they're all idiots that don't know what they want, and just want to feel like badasses. And I know my stats suck, but I'm happy with where they are at for how long I've been playing so everyone can go ahead and not bother commenting on that. It's of no relevance to my opinion. 



Doomslinger #2 Posted Jun 02 2016 - 19:41

    Major

  • Players
  • 72657 battles
  • 5,767
  • Member since:
    07-29-2012
There is one fundamental problem on the NA server and that is the server populations.  We are just too small in numbers for those ideas to work well.  I like those ideas and would love to see it work but with our low numbers, it would probably not work very well.

mike_baconggod1 #3 Posted Jun 02 2016 - 19:59

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 11693 battles
  • 86
  • Member since:
    03-22-2015
I like it because scouts sound like they will get +2 MM instead of +3

Anyway +1 WG this MM is better

DwindledSoul #4 Posted Jun 02 2016 - 20:01

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 11086 battles
  • 433
  • Member since:
    04-12-2012

View PostDoomslinger, on Jun 02 2016 - 10:41, said:

There is one fundamental problem on the NA server and that is the server populations.  We are just too small in numbers for those ideas to work well.  I like those ideas and would love to see it work but with our low numbers, it would probably not work very well.

 

Yeah we dwarf in comparison to the EU servers... :(

SAVING_THE_WORLD #5 Posted Jun 02 2016 - 20:39

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 21510 battles
  • 643
  • Member since:
    12-31-2014
We want 4-8-3 MM. 3-5-7 is just another money grubbing tactic: Make newer players rush to tier 10 and use tons of gold to convert to Free XP, because they are sick of being bottom of the list over half the time. And I can tell you, as it stands... I get bottom tier about 35+% of the time already

SAVING_THE_WORLD #6 Posted Jun 02 2016 - 20:49

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 21510 battles
  • 643
  • Member since:
    12-31-2014

Additionally, Skill based MM is stupid, Just lay that off. What really needs to be fixed is no more than 2 more heavy advantage for either team, and no more than a +/- 3 Advantage or disadvantage for mediums on either side. As for TDs and Arty, keep it the same. As for lights, add a couple a new maps that are at least 1200 meters if not 1400 meters+ , and then finally give "Scouts"  a 2 tier spread rather than a 3 tier spread. What IS the Point of being 3 tiers down when a medium tank, QUOTE "of the same tier" can do the scouting role just as good as you can, while having better armor and gun????? 

 

 

 

That is a lot to fix, considering this is just one department, (MatchMaking) of MANY that need some tweaks...

 

 

Clean up your Plate War Gaming!



Brick94 #7 Posted Jun 02 2016 - 20:58

    Captain

  • Players
  • 43421 battles
  • 1,537
  • Member since:
    08-03-2013

View PostDoomslinger, on Jun 02 2016 - 19:41, said:

There is one fundamental problem on the NA server and that is the server populations.  We are just too small in numbers for those ideas to work well.  I like those ideas and would love to see it work but with our low numbers, it would probably not work very well.

 

This is why WG and SerB don't give a crap what we have to say on our server or forum.  If you think you have a good idea and want it to get heard, post on the EU server, not here.   WG and SerB couldn't give a crap about the NA server or the market.  As far as they are concerned, we are just a bunch of whiney brats.

Fitz506 #8 Posted Jun 03 2016 - 03:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 42670 battles
  • 2,854
  • [WONKA] WONKA
  • Member since:
    04-23-2013

Random MM is the best MM. Why? It treats every player the same. Balancing by skill will just let bad players win more and good players win less.

 

You want some sort of skill filter? Play organized modes.



Phloyd113 #9 Posted Jun 03 2016 - 18:40

    First lieutenant

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

WoT's proposal shows that they have missed our complaints entirely, thus will require more spending to further FIX the MM once again, but only after many more years of losing players.

 

3-5-7 will never be accepted from those that complain about queue wait times, since that plan WILL increase the queue wait times.

 

WoT has had the opportunity to read our thoughts for the past several years, NONE OF WHICH are part of their plan to 'improve' the MM. Thus, the MM will NOT be improved, just new problems.

 

I now try to leave this topic alone since it has caused me a number of warnings from the unthinking moderators that patrol these posts. Yet, when I visit (which is now even more rare than ever, since there is nothing that can be done from here anyway), I find matchMaker posts every time.

 

The MatchMaker IS a HUGE problem, and WoT making changes outside the Community's suggestions will not fix it.

 

So, more of the same, more complaints here in the Forums, more warnings being issued by the moderators, just more crap without a fix.

 

I know whereof I speak since I spent most of my career in troubleshooting, with the notion of NOT letting a problem recur.

 

Find the root cause, determine a solution, and implement it. Don't just throw money at the problem THINKING you will fix it!

 

WoT MatchMaker, the only really bad part of the game! And now they will make it worse.



Nixeldon #10 Posted Jun 03 2016 - 23:12

    Major

  • Players
  • 60881 battles
  • 2,303
  • Member since:
    10-30-2011

View PostPhloyd113, on Jun 03 2016 - 12:40, said:

I now try to leave this topic alone since it has caused me a number of warnings from the unthinking moderators that patrol these posts. Yet, when I visit (which is now even more rare than ever, since there is nothing that can be done from here anyway), I find matchMaker posts every time. If you are receiving warnings, you must not be very constructive in your language or too insulting.

 

WoT MatchMaker, the only really bad part of the game! And now they will make it worse. Really? Weak tanks, bad maps, bad map rotation, SPGs, high RNG, CW 2.0 etc., and  your issue is MM? It is the same MM that everyone gets.

 



Rolling_Pig #11 Posted Jun 04 2016 - 01:04

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 19243 battles
  • 79
  • [T-D-W] T-D-W
  • Member since:
    12-04-2015
I am posting daily on this forum until they fix this [edited].  Im keeping track of teh XVM chance to win and comparing it to actual and its dead on.  Anything less than 30% chance to win and its an automatic loss at no better than 15-5.  So far its accurate this whole week.

Nixeldon #12 Posted Jun 04 2016 - 02:13

    Major

  • Players
  • 60881 battles
  • 2,303
  • Member since:
    10-30-2011

View PostRolling_Pig, on Jun 03 2016 - 19:04, said:

I am posting daily on this forum until they fix this [edited].  Im keeping track of teh XVM chance to win and comparing it to actual and its dead on.  Anything less than 30% chance to win and its an automatic loss at no better than 15-5.  So far its accurate this whole week.

 

XVM chance to win is 100% accurate for every match win or lose.





Also tagged with MM, Matchmaking, Skill, 3-5-7

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users