Jump to content


Why does this game have soooo many unbalanced battles?


  • Please log in to reply
67 replies to this topic

dunahee2 #1 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 02:13

    Private

  • Players
  • 21542 battles
  • 2
  • [HAND] HAND
  • Member since:
    08-05-2012

I've been playing my Rheinmetall Skorpin G today - 10 battles 

1 battle at tier 8 - 0 wins - 1 lost

3 battles at tier 9  - 1 win - 2 lost

6 battles at tier 10 - 2 wins - 4 lost

Granted I'm not the best player but seriously?  3 wins out of 10 and most were so one sided. This game is getting so frustrating to play!  Bottom line I guess I pay good money to lose at WOT! 



Striker_70 #2 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 02:17

    Major

  • Players
  • 19641 battles
  • 6,484
  • Member since:
    04-02-2013
They don't do anything to balance skill.  So we all get long short term losing and winning streaks that are not necessarily in our control. 

F_Type #3 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 02:19

    Captain

  • Players
  • 17749 battles
  • 1,160
  • [GACHI] GACHI
  • Member since:
    10-15-2012
It's working as intended. A real MM would require everyone to sit in queue for a few more seconds allowing the MM to balance the teams but no one has time for that! 

Dead_Zombie #4 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 02:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 38285 battles
  • 3,220
  • [SUX] SUX
  • Member since:
    10-09-2011

View Postdunahee2, on Jan 04 2018 - 19:13, said:

I've been playing my Rheinmetall Skorpin G today - 10 battles 

1 battle at tier 8 - 0 wins - 1 lost

3 battles at tier 9  - 1 win - 2 lost

6 battles at tier 10 - 2 wins - 4 lost

Granted I'm not the best player but seriously?  3 wins out of 10 and most were so one sided. This game is getting so frustrating to play!  Bottom line I guess I pay good money to lose at WOT! 

 

WG thinks this is what keeps people coining back... they aren't smart enough to realize that balance matches would make the game a lot more enjoyable for everybody.. but their will be plenty of trolls that will say its just random, as if they know the hidden code WG has when it comes to MM... 

Da_Craw #5 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 02:36

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 25990 battles
  • 2,978
  • [DOG5] DOG5
  • Member since:
    05-30-2014

View PostTomato_That_Drools_Alot, on Jan 04 2018 - 19:29, said:

 

WG thinks this is what keeps people coining back... they aren't smart enough to realize that balance matches would make the game a lot more enjoyable for everybody.. but their will be plenty of trolls that will say its just random, as if they know the hidden code WG has when it comes to MM... 

 

Maybe it is what keeps people coming back.  It kept me coming back over 20,000 times.  It kept YOU coming back over 30,000 times.  The matches ARE balanced, just not in the way YOU want.  A lot of people DON'T want the matches skewed in favor of poor players.  Why shouldn't the better players get the benefit of being better?  I'm barely over the Mason-Dixon line myself, I don't want to have to carry the OP every battle. 

Code4 #6 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 02:41

    Captain

  • Players
  • 49747 battles
  • 1,089
  • Member since:
    04-04-2012

Its all designed to average everyone out. This keeps people coming back. Imagine if you played a game where you lost all the time ? Loss of participation = loss of income for the owner/s.

There will always be good players and not so good players.

There are two negatives to matching based on skill based players.

1) The wait time needed for the game to make matchs. Wait longer you lose players = Loss of income.

2) Players that are 'good', start losing more often in balanced games when they have to fight their peers, leave = Loss of income.

 

Essentially, unless the player input and ideas creates income, forget it.



GeorgePreddy #7 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 02:47

    Major

  • Players
  • 14345 battles
  • 10,028
  • [L_LEG] L_LEG
  • Member since:
    04-11-2013

View PostDa_Craw, on Jan 04 2018 - 22:36, said:

 

Maybe it is what keeps people coming back.  It kept me coming back over 20,000 times.  It kept YOU coming back over 30,000 times.  The matches ARE balanced, just not in the way YOU want.  A lot of people DON'T want the matches skewed in favor of poor players.  Why shouldn't the better players get the benefit of being better?  I'm barely over the Mason-Dixon line myself, I don't want to have to carry the OP every battle. 

 

Amen, bruh !  Preach !

Dogsoldier6 #8 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 03:02

    Major

  • Players
  • 58249 battles
  • 2,773
  • [DD-S] DD-S
  • Member since:
    11-17-2011
10 Battles as a gauge of how bad/good MM is working :facepalm:

GeorgePreddy #9 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 03:05

    Major

  • Players
  • 14345 battles
  • 10,028
  • [L_LEG] L_LEG
  • Member since:
    04-11-2013

View PostTomato_That_Drools_Alot, on Jan 04 2018 - 22:29, said:

 

the more u work as a team = the funner you have even if u do lose eventually..   Random Battles are not team based as their is no Commander in Charge, if you want team based battles do Strongholds or Clan Wars

 

This also isn't skill based, as both teams get Players of all skill levels..  How is it not SBMM if you match up the teams using a skill parameter such as PR ??  Of course it's SBMM... WG is never going to ruin Random Battles by using SBMM in them.

 

 



__WarChild__ #10 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 03:28

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 21991 battles
  • 2,957
  • [Y0L0] Y0L0
  • Member since:
    06-03-2017

Matches aren't balanced.  No one seems to care about having even teams. You have to deal with it and move on.

 

I play pub matches for credits, crew skills, grinds, & for fun.  I only care about how well I perform in Strongholds, Advances and future team battles.  In pub matches, Wargaming gives you wins and losses and occasionally somewhat evenly matched teams where you can make a significant impact.  Don't sweat your winrate, it's out of your control.



Slatherer #11 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 03:40

    Major

  • Players
  • 33932 battles
  • 3,443
  • Member since:
    01-21-2014
I stopped caring about winrate s little while ago due to one issue:

Playerbase skill erosion (this is an ancient and lesser known game, after all).

I only say this despite there also being aimbot and other illegal mods in use, mismatched mm balancing (tho better now), out of control rng, and the tinfoil hat theory you're placed in harder matchups if you spike in winrate.

The playerbase is enough for me not to take my winrate seriously, anymore. Its a mosh pit and im not going to fight my way
to be king of the hill, when the hill is a garbage heap.

DVK9 #12 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 03:43

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 24956 battles
  • 561
  • [-TX-] -TX-
  • Member since:
    05-15-2013

I had a battle where the last 2 tanks were me in a M53/55 and someone from Brazil in a GW...Had to play hide and seek and blast him from hiding....that was fun

 



PunCzarBlintz #13 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 04:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 75692 battles
  • 2,856
  • [4HIM] 4HIM
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011

Why not even?

Random skill levels.

Random tank mix.

Random maps.

Even with “matched skill” teams, not every one will go to where they need to go for a “balanced” match.

70k battles and I am still here because I never know what the next battle will bring.

Oh, and go vanilla; ignorance is bliss.



dunniteowl #14 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 04:28

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 22659 battles
  • 4,963
  • Member since:
    09-01-2014

View Postdunahee2, on Jan 04 2018 - 19:13, said:

I've been playing my Rheinmetall Skorpin G today - 10 battles 

1 battle at tier 8 - 0 wins - 1 lost

3 battles at tier 9  - 1 win - 2 lost

6 battles at tier 10 - 2 wins - 4 lost

Granted I'm not the best player but seriously?  3 wins out of 10 and most were so one sided. This game is getting so frustrating to play!  Bottom line I guess I pay good money to lose at WOT! 

 

This is relatively "normal" in zero sum, winner take all, non-expansion games.  Zero Sum means there is a defined winner and loser (and in draws both sides are Losers!  :)  ), winner take all means what it obviously means and Non-expansion means that, no matter what happens in the game, you do not gain more resources.  They are finite, limited and generally reduced before the end of the match.

 

This means the moment one side loses a unit, there's one less gun in the game on that side.  Some will argue that the first to die is usually a worthless yolo suiscout anyways, though this is just as often not so and so it still matters.  The next loss of a unit adds further weight to the probability of the dominant numbers side winning.  Each subsequent loss creates what someone else described very well as a "cascading effect" wherein the sheer difference in numbers almost guarantees a heavy loss.

 

More often than not, you'll see most battles in the 15-7 to 15-8 range, with dips and rises that can reach the magical 15-0 and the equally disheartening 0-15.  On occasion you'll see low matches of something like 7-9 and a cap victory or time loss (Assault) though those don't happen that often.  Those battles everyone thinks will start happening with skill based MM aren't going to occur.  Skill is what makes a loss assured turn into a victory in those differences in numbers.  Skill is what suddenly turns the tide in a match where one side is down four units and comes out the sole winner through a combination of what can only be called good play.

 

In most cases, though, it's like playing Othello, where the balance can change with the right piece in the right place tipping the balance across the scope of the match.  Then there are those other times where it seems no matter what, the game just cannot go any other way than the way it is, be that well or ill.

 

If everyone were equally skilled, the losses might be closer a bit more often, though the mechanistic effect of the way the game is designed creates a snowballing effect with every unit lost that is not immediately balanced by a loss on the other team.  No matter how skilled the players are, there are going to be times when they are distracted by things, tired, make a mistake early on, etc.  Additionally, there are going to be times when the lesser skilled players are just ON FIRE and can do no wrong.  You cannot balance that sort of variability and even a skill based MM cannot account for that sort of randomness between how a person is going to be able to perform on any given day.

 

In short, randomness will creep into even a skill based game, because people are not perfectly consistent from day to day for many reasons that go beyond what any game algorithm could EVER factor in to it's calculations to 'balance' the teams.

 

GL, HF & HSYBF


Edited by dunniteowl, Jan 05 2018 - 04:44.


Tahllol #15 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 13:50

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 10826 battles
  • 1,016
  • Member since:
    01-31-2016

View PostDa_Craw, on Jan 05 2018 - 02:36, said:

 

Maybe it is what keeps people coming back.  It kept me coming back over 20,000 times.  It kept YOU coming back over 30,000 times.  The matches ARE balanced, just not in the way YOU want.  A lot of people DON'T want the matches skewed in favor of poor players.  Why shouldn't the better players get the benefit of being better?  I'm barely over the Mason-Dixon line myself, I don't want to have to carry the OP every battle. 

 

So you are saying you only play one battle and log out. Besides I would have to doubt that there actually has been 20000+ logins by anyone but the botting fools. 

Dead_Zombie #16 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 13:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 38285 battles
  • 3,220
  • [SUX] SUX
  • Member since:
    10-09-2011

View PostDa_Craw, on Jan 04 2018 - 19:36, said:

 

Maybe it is what keeps people coming back.  It kept me coming back over 20,000 times.  It kept YOU coming back over 30,000 times.  The matches ARE balanced, just not in the way YOU want.  A lot of people DON'T want the matches skewed in favor of poor players.  Why shouldn't the better players get the benefit of being better?  I'm barely over the Mason-Dixon line myself, I don't want to have to carry the OP every battle. 

 

I am glad you think you know what I assume to be balanced... nothing in what I said, mentions anything about the better player, or matches being skewed in favor of poor players. I just can't understood why people can't comprehend what balanced means.. wait, its in my signature..

Shrike58 #17 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 15:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 65688 battles
  • 8,357
  • [SG] SG
  • Member since:
    02-23-2013
If you want to believe the developers their finding is that what really opens up a team to getting crushed is having too many tin-clads and auto-loaders.

Da_Craw #18 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 21:53

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 25990 battles
  • 2,978
  • [DOG5] DOG5
  • Member since:
    05-30-2014

View PostTomato_That_Drools_Alot, on Jan 05 2018 - 06:56, said:

 

I am glad you think you know what I assume to be balanced... nothing in what I said, mentions anything about the better player, or matches being skewed in favor of poor players. I just can't understood why people can't comprehend what balanced means.. wait, its in my signature..

 

I read your sig. It was the basis for my comment.  You want matches balanced by PR.  I am taking the extreme liberty of equating higher PR with higher skill/experience, which I assume you are doing also, (otherwise why use PR as a metric?).  If you had 15 PR 3000 players on one side and 13 PR 3000 players and 2 5000 PR players on the other, you want to swap a 3000 on one team for a 5000 from the other team, no?  Ergo, you want 14 3000 PR players to benefit at the expense of 2 5000 PR players.   

Da_Craw #19 Posted Jan 05 2018 - 21:54

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 25990 battles
  • 2,978
  • [DOG5] DOG5
  • Member since:
    05-30-2014

View PostTahllol, on Jan 05 2018 - 06:50, said:

 

So you are saying you only play one battle and log out. Besides I would have to doubt that there actually has been 20000+ logins by anyone but the botting fools. 

 

Ah, yes.  The "deliberately dense" response.

StiffWind #20 Posted Jan 06 2018 - 01:19

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 15070 battles
  • 2,073
  • [MOV] MOV
  • Member since:
    03-15-2017

Bottom Line:  Making money is more important than offering a fair battle.

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users