Jump to content


How unfair can you be?


  • Please log in to reply
91 replies to this topic

Da_Craw #81 Posted Jan 14 2018 - 07:50

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 25236 battles
  • 2,713
  • [DOG5] DOG5
  • Member since:
    05-30-2014

View PostMfezi, on Jan 13 2018 - 16:11, said:

 

Noted, but an analogy which more closely equates to my initial post is that if you pick two teams from a pool of 1st Division, 2nd Division and 3rd Division players, you should ensure that the teams are evenly matched in order to provide enjoyable entertainment for both players and spectators alike!.....

 

Except that never happens anywhere.  Some teams are just better.  That is why we root for underdogs.  There will never be perfectly even teams and frankly, what constitutes even teams will never been agreed upon.  You get random teammates and opponents.  It balances out over time.

Mashi_VroomVroom_Wow #82 Posted Jan 14 2018 - 10:09

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 13207 battles
  • 112
  • [YOUJO] YOUJO
  • Member since:
    12-25-2012
At this point OP, I think you're more interested in arguing than with actually finding a way to solve what you see as an issue.

Mfezi #83 Posted Jan 14 2018 - 11:13

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 14471 battles
  • 253
  • Member since:
    04-05-2016

View PostMashirasou, on Jan 14 2018 - 10:09, said:

At this point OP, I think you're more interested in arguing than with actually finding a way to solve what you see as an issue.

 

The issue is unfair matching of teams, My suggested solution is SBMM.

Nothing wrong with some healthy discussion / debate / argument - that's how problems get solved. Nothing is achieved by trying to discredit the OP based on his stats.

 

 



Mfezi #84 Posted Jan 14 2018 - 12:07

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 14471 battles
  • 253
  • Member since:
    04-05-2016

View Postscharnhorst310, on Jan 14 2018 - 06:40, said:

 

MM is fine because... it is fair. You, me, and Joe blow in the back are treated identically. You might say identically poorly, but identically nonetheless. I get good teams, I get bad teams; and i get a lot in the middle just like everyone else. That is FAIR. The key is I don't know what games are are good and bad so I play each like they are up for grabs (not to mention the game wants you to do that because your rewards are based on performance as well).

 

I could look at the game you posted and see you win and I wouldn't so much as bat an eyelash. All a battle is, are dozens and dozens of small actions that ultimately lead to an outcome. You can watch tourneys vids or clan wars, evenly matched teams end in blowouts all the time. It only takes one little push to start an avalanche. 

 

Your idea to make a match more even would simply always ensure you get an enemy team that is balanced against good players, and for bad players. You've removed an incentive to win. The better you play the more difficult every match will be as it tries to build teams to deal against you; but if you're bad it makes sure that other team will get to have a bad player every time... great.

 

Since WG will never do anything like this, the discussion is purely academic. If i was you my next rebuttal would be to say 'just make teams even, who cares if everyone is close to 50% winrate at least the matches will be even'. Well besides the fact that blowouts in even matches are still very common; you'd lose the entire value of playing when you lose the drive to win. Why would I charge a corner for my team, or push a flank if winning did not matter? It wouldn't, so everyone would sit and wait for the idiots to rush out and try to get as much damage as they could because that is my only source of consistent rewards. Wow that sounds like fun gameplay to me! 
 

The lesson is, like anything else in life you don't control everything, but how you handle the things you do control is what matters. In this case, everyone controls how well they play, and in this style MM overtime that will dictate how much you are going to win. 

 

You do actually make some sense when you are not trying to dis me!. I have no problem with some well placed sarcasm, but I do try to avoid personal insults on the forum.

 

The background to this post was the ongoing complaints directed to this forum, that MM was broken. One of the responses demanded evidence of these allegations, and when I installed XVM the other day, I was convinced that I had found the answer. In virtually every game where there was a preponderance of good players on one side, that team won, usually a total blowout.

 

My conclusion was that in order minimize these unbalanced matches, MM needed to take player skill into account.

 

For various reasons, none of which really convince me, this is a big NO, NO for some players who seem to think that it would benefit only the tomatoes / potatoes / pubbies / 46% ers etc.

 

For the record, I really enjoy the game, warts and all, but there is always room for improvement and I am suggesting that this might be one of the ways to enhance the experience!....

 



o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7 #85 Posted Jan 14 2018 - 12:38

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 423 battles
  • 574
  • [ITDED] ITDED
  • Member since:
    01-23-2015

View PostMfezi, on Jan 14 2018 - 11:13, said:

 

The issue is unfair matching of teams, My suggested solution is SBMM.

Nothing wrong with some healthy discussion / debate / argument - that's how problems get solved. Nothing is achieved by trying to discredit the OP based on his stats.

 

 

 

so you are pushing for skill based. say it happens. in 2 days you will be whining you are only getting 100% crapteams. then what?

Mfezi #86 Posted Jan 14 2018 - 13:01

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 14471 battles
  • 253
  • Member since:
    04-05-2016

View Posto7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7o7, on Jan 14 2018 - 12:38, said:

 

so you are pushing for skill based. say it happens. in 2 days you will be whining you are only getting 100% crapteams. then what?

 

I think it's time for a *** Yawn ****

OldFrog75 #87 Posted Jan 14 2018 - 13:23

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 9849 battles
  • 2,203
  • [5M0K3] 5M0K3
  • Member since:
    02-23-2017
Why don't they just make Proving Grounds the same as Co-Op in WoWS?  Play any tank/tier as often as you want but give reduced Credit and XP rewards for those battles.  Are they afraid so many players would opt for that their income would drop or what?

VooDooKobra #88 Posted Jan 14 2018 - 21:50

    Major

  • Players
  • 8091 battles
  • 3,391
  • [MOVE] MOVE
  • Member since:
    04-23-2011

View PostOldFrog75, on Jan 14 2018 - 05:23, said:

Why don't they just make Proving Grounds the same as Co-Op in WoWS?  Play any tank/tier as often as you want but give reduced Credit and XP rewards for those battles.  Are they afraid so many players would opt for that their income would drop or what?

 

since you would have to run more battles to get the same xp there are those who would see it as a cash grab because you fire the same amount of ammo for a lesser result.  personally i would not mind that idea especially when it comes to playing stock

JRos1983 #89 Posted Jan 14 2018 - 22:19

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 571 battles
  • 137
  • Member since:
    12-22-2017
Uninstall XVM and you will be happier.

OldFrog75 #90 Posted Jan 14 2018 - 23:31

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 9849 battles
  • 2,203
  • [5M0K3] 5M0K3
  • Member since:
    02-23-2017

View PostVooDooKobra, on Jan 14 2018 - 21:50, said:

 

since you would have to run more battles to get the same xp there are those who would see it as a cash grab because you fire the same amount of ammo for a lesser result.  personally i would not mind that idea especially when it comes to playing stock

 

I play WoWS and I don't see it that way.  Co-Op battle stats are kept separate from Random battle stats and generally all of the enemy and most of the players on your team are bots regardless of tier.  It's a great way to learn how to play a new ship/tank in any tier and as I said before, there are no limitations as to how many battles you can play in that mode.

 

Additionally, when a player gets tired of getting their rear end kicked in Randoms, Co-Op is a nice alternative to amp down and improve one's skills without jeopardizing your Random stats and you still earn something for your efforts.


Edited by OldFrog75, Jan 14 2018 - 23:33.


Slim_Shadee #91 Posted Jan 15 2018 - 00:20

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 6351 battles
  • 764
  • Member since:
    03-04-2011

View PostF_Type, on Jan 12 2018 - 16:54, said:

MM that takes skill into account would make too much sense for WG

 

Explain "skill". Is that win rate ( excluding rerolls)? Skill on that map based on PR, Win Rate Win 8? Skill in that specific tank on that map based on which of various stat reports you want to pick. Perhaps its skill in tank type. Skill based on time of day, platoon or not, in heavys, on that map in that specific mode excluding rerolls or platoon stats or early stats verses later stats verses what day of the FREAKING month it is?

 

SBMM DOES NOT Solve a single issue in MM unless its taken to such a minute detail the Q becomes impossible to satisfy. You also know that if your a good player and finding a match with another good player on the other team DOES NOT INSURE the rest of your damn team wont be 44%ers. What it does mean is you may sit there for 15 minutes in Q. NOW THAT WILL INSURE THE PLAYer BASE REMAINS HIGH.

 

The Nirvana of skill MM is one of the most stupid things the player base crys for on here. It is not an answer to anything.



Mfezi #92 Posted Jan 15 2018 - 01:08

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 14471 battles
  • 253
  • Member since:
    04-05-2016

View PostSlim_Shadee, on Jan 15 2018 - 00:20, said:

 

Explain "skill". Is that win rate ( excluding rerolls)? Skill on that map based on PR, Win Rate Win 8? Skill in that specific tank on that map based on which of various stat reports you want to pick. Perhaps its skill in tank type. Skill based on time of day, platoon or not, in heavys, on that map in that specific mode excluding rerolls or platoon stats or early stats verses later stats verses what day of the FREAKING month it is?

 

SBMM DOES NOT Solve a single issue in MM unless its taken to such a minute detail the Q becomes impossible to satisfy. You also know that if your a good player and finding a match with another good player on the other team DOES NOT INSURE the rest of your damn team wont be 44%ers. What it does mean is you may sit there for 15 minutes in Q. NOW THAT WILL INSURE THE PLAYer BASE REMAINS HIGH.

 

The Nirvana of skill MM is one of the most stupid things the player base crys for on here. It is not an answer to anything.

 

If we could bet on the outcome of each battle, those using XVM would become very rich simply by identifying teams with a preponderance of good players.

 

The gambling board would shut down XVM very quickly OR insist that MM be upgraded to include player skill!....


Edited by Mfezi, Jan 15 2018 - 01:10.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users