Jump to content


I don't care what you or WG says, I'm convinced MM is rigged.


  • Please log in to reply
81 replies to this topic

Urabouttudie #61 Posted Aug 11 2017 - 22:55

    Captain

  • Players
  • 18366 battles
  • 1,101
  • Member since:
    11-11-2013

View PostKliphie, on Aug 11 2017 - 05:38, said:

 

WG can't make a functioning in game chat yet they're able to manipulate players RNG on the fly?  That seems sane?

 

 

 

I never mentioned RNG did I? The letters RNG don't even exist as a reference in my post....

 

What I said, in very simply terms now, is this....

 

The playerbase here on the forums INSISTS that WG does not control the player experience through the MM

 

WG announced, and has now implemented a method of controlling the player exp[experience through the MM by way of manipulating your tier placement

 

The playerbase here on the forums STILL INSISTS that WG does not control the player experience through the MM...

 

and here you are claiming they couldn't possibly control the player experience because they can't or won;t fix a chat bug???

 

Who is the one with the tin foil hat on here???



Nunya_000 #62 Posted Aug 11 2017 - 23:03

    Major

  • Players
  • 20635 battles
  • 9,398
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostUrabouttudie, on Aug 11 2017 - 13:55, said:

 

I never mentioned RNG did I? The letters RNG don't even exist as a reference in my post....

 

What I said, in very simply terms now, is this....

 

The playerbase here on the forums INSISTS that WG does not control the player experience through the MM

 

WG announced, and has now implemented a method of controlling the player exp[experience through the MM by way of manipulating your tier placement

 

The playerbase here on the forums STILL INSISTS that WG does not control the player experience through the MM...

 

and here you are claiming they couldn't possibly control the player experience because they can't or won;t fix a chat bug???

 

Who is the one with the tin foil hat on here???

 

I don't think I have seen a single person claim that our "experience" is not manipulated.  Heck, there was even a time when we were pretty much guaranteed to be top tier the first time playing a tank.  What is often claimed is that the game is not rigged to control win rates....which is what he tin-foil crowd is positive is happening.

Urabouttudie #63 Posted Aug 11 2017 - 23:08

    Captain

  • Players
  • 18366 battles
  • 1,101
  • Member since:
    11-11-2013

View PostNunya_000, on Aug 11 2017 - 14:03, said:

 

I don't think I have seen a single person claim that our "experience" is not manipulated.  Heck, there was even a time when we were pretty much guaranteed to be top tier the first time playing a tank.  What is often claimed is that the game is not rigged to control win rates....which is what he tin-foil crowd is positive is happening.

 

True, and no I don't buy into the controlled win side of things either.

 

Kliphie was just saying I'd said something about RNG which I hadn't so I was responding



Anoniponi #64 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 01:23

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 16521 battles
  • 91
  • Member since:
    07-09-2013
Games are supposed to get more difficult the more you play. Dun see why this game would be an exception. At least it's designed to give you a break if you suck for too long. You'd think people would be happy about that.

Grimdancer #65 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 01:44

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 15770 battles
  • 176
  • Member since:
    09-07-2011

View PostNunya_000, on Aug 11 2017 - 22:03, said:

 

I don't think I have seen a single person claim that our "experience" is not manipulated.  Heck, there was even a time when we were pretty much guaranteed to be top tier the first time playing a tank.  What is often claimed is that the game is not rigged to control win rates....which is what he tin-foil crowd is positive is happening.

 

I never once suggested MM was manipulated to CONTROL win%. I'm suggesting that your recent win% is being used to determine team composition. The patent clearly states this. If you are winning too much, you will be placed accordingly. I never said WG does this to intentionally lower a players win%.

 

However, by default, such placement could very dramatically effect it.

 

Even IF such manipulation of "battle groups" only means they are putting you in higher tiers, that is still a very clear and obvious manipulation of MM. that can and WILL effect your win%.

 

It blows my mind that WG has ADMITTED to manipulating the MM system based purely on your win/losses, yet there are STILL soo many naive forum dwellers denying it.

 

If they admit to manipulating MM in ANY fashion, the tinfoil hat wearers are those refusing to accept the possibility it's being manipulated slightly different than what's already been exposed.



Nunya_000 #66 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 04:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 20635 battles
  • 9,398
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostGrimdancer, on Aug 11 2017 - 16:44, said:

 

I never once suggested MM was manipulated to CONTROL win%. I'm suggesting that your recent win% is being used to determine team composition. The patent clearly states this. If you are winning too much, you will be placed accordingly. I never said WG does this to intentionally lower a players win%.

 

However, by default, such placement could very dramatically effect it.

 

Even IF such manipulation of "battle groups" only means they are putting you in higher tiers, that is still a very clear and obvious manipulation of MM. that can and WILL effect your win%.

 

It blows my mind that WG has ADMITTED to manipulating the MM system based purely on your win/losses, yet there are STILL soo many naive forum dwellers denying it.

 

If they admit to manipulating MM in ANY fashion, the tinfoil hat wearers are those refusing to accept the possibility it's being manipulated slightly different than what's already been exposed.

 

Your whole opening OP very pointedly implied that MM is designed to control our WR%.

 

High tier or low tier, by itself, does not increase or decrease the chance to win...especially for the average player.  However, a bad player could actually hurt their team's chance to win if they are high tier (especially with the new MM) and a good player can still help their team win when they are low tier.  The "challenge" and the "make easier" is all about the battles themselves.  With a lot of lower tier tanks for target, It can certainly be "easier" to perform better when high tier....and it can definitely be more "challenging" when facing more higher tier tanks.

 

Just because something is in the patent, that does not mean it is in the code.  Since the new MM came out, it is difficult to see how that paragraph would even fit with the new MM.  It would be much harder to implement for 30 players per battle with the tight MM tiering and the 5/10 and one tier battles.  Though WG did say that if we had too many battles at low tier we would have a higher chance to be high tier.

 

Besides, it shouldn't really matter anyway.  Is the game fun to play?  If so, play it and enjoy it.  Seems like a waste to lose sleep over whether a computer game is rigged/manipulating us or not.



NeatoMan #67 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 04:40

    Major

  • Players
  • 24117 battles
  • 15,013
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostGrimdancer, on Aug 11 2017 - 19:44, said:

 

I never once suggested MM was manipulated to CONTROL win%. I'm suggesting that your recent win% is being used to determine team composition. The patent clearly states this. If you are winning too much, you will be placed accordingly. I never said WG does this to intentionally lower a players win%.

 

However, by default, such placement could very dramatically effect it.

 

Even IF such manipulation of "battle groups" only means they are putting you in higher tiers, that is still a very clear and obvious manipulation of MM. that can and WILL effect your win%.

 

It blows my mind that WG has ADMITTED to manipulating the MM system based purely on your win/losses, yet there are STILL soo many naive forum dwellers denying it.

 

If they admit to manipulating MM in ANY fashion, the tinfoil hat wearers are those refusing to accept the possibility it's being manipulated slightly different than what's already been exposed.

but then we should all be able to see some cause and effect with battle tiers.  It should show up with just a little tracking of win% and battle tier.



Urabouttudie #68 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 15:28

    Captain

  • Players
  • 18366 battles
  • 1,101
  • Member since:
    11-11-2013

View PostNeatoMan, on Aug 11 2017 - 19:40, said:

but then we should all be able to see some cause and effect with battle tiers.  It should show up with just a little tracking of win% and battle tier.

 

I am something of a control case in this study....

 

I've been playing the same tank at the same tiers on the same server at the same time of day...pretty much every day for many months now.

 

Prior to 3/5/7 I was on a flat WR trajectory spanning a few thousand battles, which began when I hit 52% and prior to the introduction of the MM changes.

 

 

...post 3/5/7 I am now again on an ascending WR trajectory. Nothing has changed on my end and I am not doing anything differently.

 

What did change is;

NA servers lost about 10k active daily players

WG introduced TWO changes to the MM,

  • Battle Tier placement manipulation [ie; you are moved up if down too long, (tier position tracking)]
  • 3/5/7, 5/10 & 10/10 Matchmaking tier Placement [the number of battle tier tanks you are placed with]

 

Certainly this is anecdotal evidence but it is very telling, to my own eye anyways. There appears to be a direct correlation between WG's tier positioning changes and my WR increases. Of course I still had to play fairly well in order to win more battles, the changes just made it easier to do.

 

Cause...and...effect.

 

DISCLAIMER: This is not to say that I think MM is controlling or influencing whether I win or lose a battle!!



Nunya_000 #69 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 16:05

    Major

  • Players
  • 20635 battles
  • 9,398
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostUrabouttudie, on Aug 12 2017 - 06:28, said:

 

I am something of a control case in this study....

 

I've been playing the same tank at the same tiers on the same server at the same time of day...pretty much every day for many months now.

 

Prior to 3/5/7 I was on a flat WR trajectory spanning a few thousand battles, which began when I hit 52% and prior to the introduction of the MM changes.

 

 

...post 3/5/7 I am now again on an ascending WR trajectory. Nothing has changed on my end and I am not doing anything differently.

 

What did change is;

NA servers lost about 10k active daily players

WG introduced TWO changes to the MM,

  • Battle Tier placement manipulation [ie; you are moved up if down too long, (tier position tracking)]
  • 3/5/7, 5/10 & 10/10 Matchmaking tier Placement [the number of battle tier tanks you are placed with]

 

Certainly this is anecdotal evidence but it is very telling, to my own eye anyways. There appears to be a direct correlation between WG's tier positioning changes and my WR increases. Of course I still had to play fairly well in order to win more battles, the changes just made it easier to do.

 

Cause...and...effect.

 

DISCLAIMER: This is not to say that I think MM is controlling or influencing whether I win or lose a battle!!

 

The average WR% is around 48%.  That is because for every winner of a battle, there is a loser....with about 2% being draws.  While any "tier manipulation" may work for you, someone else has their WR drop proportionately to your gain....or a group of players have a combined drop to equal your gain.  Maybe the new MM fits your play style or maybe you have just had a string of decent teams...or maybe you are just improving and making more of an impact in your battles.  Point is, any "manipulation" of MM is not going to have much impact on our performance or WR over the long run, but it can impact our frustrations.

Urabouttudie #70 Posted Aug 12 2017 - 16:25

    Captain

  • Players
  • 18366 battles
  • 1,101
  • Member since:
    11-11-2013

View PostNunya_000, on Aug 12 2017 - 07:05, said:

 

The average WR% is around 48%.  That is because for every winner of a battle, there is a loser....with about 2% being draws.  While any "tier manipulation" may work for you, someone else has their WR drop proportionately to your gain....or a group of players have a combined drop to equal your gain.  Maybe the new MM fits your play style or maybe you have just had a string of decent teams...or maybe you are just improving and making more of an impact in your battles.  Point is, any "manipulation" of MM is not going to have much impact on our performance or WR over the long run, but it can impact our frustrations.

 

Oh I agree, it could be one or more of any number of factors that has influenced the change, the coincidence does stand out as to cause and effect though and my only point. I'm certainly not complaining about the new MM as I appear to be benefiting from the changes.

NeatoMan #71 Posted Aug 13 2017 - 02:28

    Major

  • Players
  • 24117 battles
  • 15,013
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostUrabouttudie, on Aug 12 2017 - 09:28, said:

 

I am something of a control case in this study....

 

I've been playing the same tank at the same tiers on the same server at the same time of day...pretty much every day for many months now.

 

Prior to 3/5/7 I was on a flat WR trajectory spanning a few thousand battles, which began when I hit 52% and prior to the introduction of the MM changes.

 

...post 3/5/7 I am now again on an ascending WR trajectory. Nothing has changed on my end and I am not doing anything differently.

 

What did change is;

NA servers lost about 10k active daily players

WG introduced TWO changes to the MM,

  • Battle Tier placement manipulation [ie; you are moved up if down too long, (tier position tracking)]
  • 3/5/7, 5/10 & 10/10 Matchmaking tier Placement [the number of battle tier tanks you are placed with]

 

Certainly this is anecdotal evidence but it is very telling, to my own eye anyways. There appears to be a direct correlation between WG's tier positioning changes and my WR increases. Of course I still had to play fairly well in order to win more battles, the changes just made it easier to do.

 

Cause...and...effect.

 

DISCLAIMER: This is not to say that I think MM is controlling or influencing whether I win or lose a battle!!

You really can't compare pre/post 9.19 MM.  Certain tanks and players do much better in the new MM, and others don't.  My luchs is running 70%+ solo pub in the new MM.  I stopped playing it because it's just too OP for the new MM.

 

What I'm talking about is under the same MM do you get more bottom tier games when you were winning, and more top tier when losing?  Pretty simple thing to track.    Just saying you've been winning more or losing more than average, with nothing to pin it on doesn't indicate anything.

 

Another thing I didn't take into account with that win rate paragraph is that it states:

"the matchmaking server may store a win/loss percentage for each user (or vehicle) at a given battle level."

 

I did most of my comparisons between good and bad tanks at the same tier (e.g. Tiger, vs Tiger P), and saw no difference between a good tank and one I was terrible in.  They would balance each other out, so at tier 7 my overall win rate stayed the same when combined.  I need to find a battle tier I suck at and track that MM.  For me it would be battle tier 11 or 12, so kinda hard to see any effect there.  Maybe it's time to get a yolo account for comparison?



EmperorJuliusCaesar #72 Posted Aug 13 2017 - 06:56

    Captain

  • Players
  • 18284 battles
  • 1,251
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostNunya_000, on Aug 10 2017 - 12:01, said:

View PostGrimdancer, on Aug 10 2017 - 11:45, said:

I'm no pro, but my win% is was on the rise.

 

I've been playing mostly tanks I do well in. Tanks that fit me well and I play well, and all have win% higher than 50%. Over the course of the last few months, my win% and overall ratings have been going up.

 

But every once in a while I get on streaks like the one I am on right now. Bad. Very bad. The last few days I've lost nearly 75% of the battles I've played. It doesn't seem to matter how well I do. I'm doing just as well as I always have in the tanks I've always done well with. The difference is the teams I'm getting put on. They are bad. Very bad. Constantly doing outrageously dumb/stupid things to get themselves killed. I am convinced that when you play well and your win% starts to steadily rise, you get put with tomatoes by design.

 

Here is a snip from the WG patent on Matchmaking. You can find the full patent here https://www.google.c...tents/US8425330

 

According to another aspect, the matchmaking server may store a win/loss percentage for each user (or vehicle) at a given battle level. As the player's win/loss ratio decreases, the player becomes more likely to be placed in battles having battle levels at the lower end of the allowable range, whereas as the player's win/loss ration increases, the player becomes more likely to be placed in battles having battle levels at the upper end of the allowable range. Thus, when a player has been repeatedly put into too many difficult battles, the balancing is done in favor of easier battle sessions, thereby encouraging the player by providing an easier game environment. Similarly, when the player has been repeatedly put into too many easy battles, the balancing is done in favor of harder battle sessions, thereby keeping the player challenged instead of letting the player become bored with easy games

 

How can you argue with that? The wording of their own patent makes it clear that MM is intentionally designed to make things more "challenging" for players that get on win streaks.

 

I get it. Purple players must be good enough to overcome these epic, 3 day losing streaks. But that doesn't change the fix. It only means they are good enough to overcome it by whatever means necessary.

 

I've heard people say that WG claims they don't use this aspect of the patent. I don't believe it. It matches too closely with exactly what many of us have seen with our own eyes. Why should we believe them? Just because they "say it ain't so"? It would be terrible for business if they ever admitted to using this system, yet there it is in black and white as part of their own patent. Whether they admit to it or not, they designed it and legally deterred anyone else from using it.

 

I've also heard people say "Your win% is just above 50%, why would it consider you a good enough player to be effected by this"? Well the wording doesn't say anything about overall wins/losses. It clearly indicates most recent wins/losses.

 

So how do you feel they are "challenging" you?

 

There is nothing in that paragraph you quote saying that it is an attempt to make you win or lose.  What they are talking about is making you top tier more often if you have been losing (easier)....or making you bottom tier more often if you have been winning (challenging).  Being top tier or bottom tier does not dictate whether you will win or lose.

 

You are basically taking a paragraph in the patent....not understanding what it is actually saying...and then creating a false argument.

 

"What they are talking about is making you top tier more often if you have been losing (easier)"

 

I never have "great days"  yet if I play tier 6, always see tier 8s, play tier 8, always see tier 10s, play tier 10, almost always tier 12.  Yet, there are clearly games that are rigged.  One side has 2 yellows as their worst players, other side has 2 yellows as best, yeah, totally random. 

 



Urabouttudie #73 Posted Aug 13 2017 - 16:35

    Captain

  • Players
  • 18366 battles
  • 1,101
  • Member since:
    11-11-2013

View PostNeatoMan, on Aug 12 2017 - 17:28, said:

My luchs is running 70%+ solo pub in the new MM.  I stopped playing it because it's just too OP for the new MM.

 

and only 209 battles over the last [at least] 60 days?

 

I guess it's like that old adage says, "who am I going to believe, you or my lying eyes?" right?

 

ps...your luchs is only at 61% according to wotlabs...



NeatoMan #74 Posted Aug 13 2017 - 20:21

    Major

  • Players
  • 24117 battles
  • 15,013
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostUrabouttudie, on Aug 13 2017 - 10:35, said:

 

and only 209 battles over the last [at least] 60 days?

 

I guess it's like that old adage says, "who am I going to believe, you or my lying eyes?" right?

 

ps...your luchs is only at 61% according to wotlabs...

"My luchs is running 70%+ solo pub in the new MM"   

 

unfortunately, noobmeter doesn't split at the beginning of patches.  I have to go all the way back to april 1.  Was running 70% with the new LT tiers.  It didn't let up in the new MM, so I stopped playing it.

http://www.noobmeter...20170805_145944



Drseckzytime #75 Posted Aug 13 2017 - 21:13

    Major

  • Players
  • 16085 battles
  • 2,190
  • [PBLRD] PBLRD
  • Member since:
    04-04-2011
MM is certainly rigged.  There's no doubt.  It's in their patent.  How rigged it really is, that's the question.  There's a reason "scheduled loses and wins" happen.  There's also games where your RNG is INCREDIBLY bad during these "scheduled loses."

NeatoMan #76 Posted Aug 13 2017 - 21:47

    Major

  • Players
  • 24117 battles
  • 15,013
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostDrseckzytime, on Aug 13 2017 - 15:13, said:

MM is certainly rigged.  There's no doubt.  It's in their patent.  How rigged it really is, that's the question.  There's a reason "scheduled loses and wins" happen.  There's also games where your RNG is INCREDIBLY bad during these "scheduled loses."

The patent deals only with battle tiers.    Never says a word about any other mechanism



Shortcult #77 Posted Aug 13 2017 - 21:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 30150 battles
  • 3,674
  • Member since:
    08-21-2012

Just wow.

 

You people have evidence that the United States really put men on the moon?  Or that the Space shuttle actually ever flew?  I mean can you prove it?

 

This is what happens when people substitute aluminum foil for tin foil.  They are not interchangeable folks.  Proly to late tho, it would appear the damage has already been done.

 

 

You are saying, and stop me when I err, that the company that cannot maintain a chat server (maybe not an item that creates income, but an item without which a loss of income will occur) but is intelligent and diabolical enough to create a system to control individual players win rates, that by the way will also negatively effect income, would do so?  Read it again slowly and digest it.  Now, logically, what is the correct answer?

 

Oh, BTW, chat server, pretty damned simple.  Plenty of examples, old and new, exist.  Yes, little harder to incorporate inside your running software, but not impossible.  So the 'it doesn't count' argument is null and void.  Just shaddup wit dat krap.



Urabouttudie #78 Posted Aug 13 2017 - 22:30

    Captain

  • Players
  • 18366 battles
  • 1,101
  • Member since:
    11-11-2013

View PostNeatoMan, on Aug 13 2017 - 11:21, said:

"My luchs is running 70%+ solo pub in the new MM"   

 

unfortunately, noobmeter doesn't split at the beginning of patches.  I have to go all the way back to april 1.  Was running 70% with the new LT tiers.  It didn't let up in the new MM, so I stopped playing it.

http://www.noobmeter...20170805_145944

 

I have to question the validity of your claim...ie; that I really cannot compare pre/post 9.19 MM because the recent stats for your Luchs have apparently proven to you that it is now OP under the new MM rules. What are the facts with which you have drawn this conclusion?

 

a 4 month span of time....

Results for Apr 1, 2017 - Aug 5, 2017 for NeatoMan:

# Tank Type Nation Tier Battles Win Rate
             
3 PzKpfw II Luchs LT DE 4 44 70.45%

source: http://www.noobmeter.com/recent/na/NeatoMan/1000967299/1000967299_00023508_20170402_035402/1000967299_00024059_20170805_145944

 

and 44 battles...

 

View PostNeatoMan, on Aug 12 2017 - 17:28, said:

You really can't compare pre/post 9.19 MM....My luchs is running 70%+ solo pub in the new MM.  I stopped playing it because it's just too OP for the new MM.

 

You are now arguing that I really can't compare pre/post 9.19 MM because you made a conscious decision to stop playing that tank because 44 battles in it over a 4-month window determines things now for you?

 

The presupposition here being that I should take your word for it because you are speaking from the "voice of authority" as Neatoman with all the historical data...

 

I'm gonna have to go with my lyin' eyes for $1000 Bob.

 

 

 

 



OldFrog75 #79 Posted Aug 13 2017 - 22:53

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 6183 battles
  • 1,254
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    02-23-2017

View PostGrimdancer, on Aug 12 2017 - 01:44, said:

 

 The patent clearly states this. If you are winning too much, you will be placed accordingly.

 

What is too much? 



NeatoMan #80 Posted Aug 13 2017 - 22:54

    Major

  • Players
  • 24117 battles
  • 15,013
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostUrabouttudie, on Aug 13 2017 - 16:30, said:

 

I have to question the validity of your claim...ie; that I really cannot compare pre/post 9.19 MM because the recent stats for your Luchs have apparently proven to you that it is now OP under the new MM rules. What are the facts with which you have drawn this conclusion?

 

a 4 month span of time....

Results for Apr 1, 2017 - Aug 5, 2017 for NeatoMan:

# Tank Type Nation Tier Battles Win Rate
             
3 PzKpfw II Luchs LT DE 4 44 70.45%

source: http://www.noobmeter.com/recent/na/NeatoMan/1000967299/1000967299_00023508_20170402_035402/1000967299_00024059_20170805_145944

 

and 44 battles...

 

You are now arguing that I really can't compare pre/post 9.19 MM because you made a conscious decision to stop playing that tank because 44 battles in it over a 4-month window determines things now for you?

I'm agreeing that you can't compare based on noobmeter, since it didn't split games in that time span, but I was winning at a 70% rate.  

 

After playing a tank for 1000 games it becomes pretty obvious when major changes happen.  This is one of them.   The Luchs is OP in the down tiered LT MM.  The new MM format hasn't done anything to curb that.   It's pretty much seal clubbing in that tank nowadays.

 

This chart of recent server stats over the last month (green curve) pretty much confirms it.

 


Edited by NeatoMan, Aug 13 2017 - 23:27.





3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users