Jump to content


how come you don't take skill/win rate into account in matchmaking


  • Please log in to reply
1967 replies to this topic

EmperorJuliusCaesar #1761 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 04:23

    Major

  • Players
  • 37052 battles
  • 5,744
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostHurk, on Mar 13 2018 - 08:51, said:

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 12 2018 - 07:16, said:

 

No such thing as a fixed game you say....

Spoiler

When the 'random' mm puts all the skill onto one team THAT IS A FIXED GAME.  There is no other way to look at it.  Burying your head in the sand, chalking it up to 's**t happens', making yourself feel better because sometimes you get the good team....   Are all absolutely weak excuses for the crap that is random mm.  We can clearly see these mismatches happen.  It's very easy to fix.  That WG hasn't yet shouldn't stop, we the consumers, from logging our complaints about it and making them change it.

-

No one is saying we are 100% in control of the match.  What we are saying is MM is 100% control of the match.  Battles like the one above happen every time I've ever played.  (Not every battle, but certainly several times a session).  This is crap.  It needs to stop.  We are tired of it.

 

Playing in a 'fixed' outcome game is about 'gameplay'.  Sure, I can set myself up to farm damage and experience - but that's not really what I'd call 'good gameplay'.  Give me a level playing field every time...

one anecdote is not proof of anything. 

there is nothing fixed about the team you are on. the next battle you are no longer on that team, thus its random, its anything but fixed. 

MM doesnt control anything except a queue of people waiting to play.

learn to win 5% chance games. for those that dont pay attention, thats a 1 in 20 chance. you can win these matches, if your team simply doesnt play "average" and the enemy team doesnt play "average". etc. 

 

the next match, when you are on the other team, the results are different. the only constant is YOU. YOU determine your win rate. not the MM. 

 

Keep that head buried FIRMLY in the ground man.  If you choose to be deaf and blind and fail to understand something so simple, there is no hope for you.  When you have a team of greens and blues vs a team of reds and oranges, gg, it's over, MM did in FACT decide that battle, not with malice, but because of a lack of programming to make a match worth playing for either side. 

We laugh at those that say "it's a rarity" or "it's so rare it's not worth fixing".  When in FACT, we see it EVERY SINGLE DAY.



NeatoMan #1762 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 04:30

    Major

  • Players
  • 28204 battles
  • 20,753
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 13 2018 - 22:23, said:

Keep that head buried FIRMLY in the ground man.  If you choose to be deaf and blind and fail to understand something so simple, there is no hope for you.  When you have a team of greens and blues vs a team of reds and oranges, gg, it's over, MM did in FACT decide that battle, not with malice, but because of a lack of programming to make a match worth playing for either side. 

We laugh at those that say "it's a rarity" or "it's so rare it's not worth fixing".  When in FACT, we see it EVERY SINGLE DAY.

Of course you see it every day because you are one of those players that makes your team full of red players.  Your chances of getting one of those teams is higher than the average player.  I see them far less often than you do.  In fact, I can tell you exactly how often i get them.  I have over 7k screenshots that tell me how often i get those games.  It's less than 1% of the time.

 

Even HiBan's simulation shows how rare those games are (yellow arrows and beyond), but if it makes you feel better about losing then keep posting your wild exaggerations



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1763 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 04:34

    Major

  • Players
  • 37052 battles
  • 5,744
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostNeatoMan, on Mar 13 2018 - 12:17, said:

View Posteteam, on Mar 13 2018 - 14:03, said:

​I believe that the probability of a good game experience is dramatically increased when teams are balanced.  (I guess good game play experience is subjective and we weight things differently depending on perspective)

 

Yes some underdog teams win and yes some mismatched team games can provide a good game experience. But over the long term imo skill balanced games have a higher probability of providing a better game experience just because those very unbalanced games are unlikely to provide it for me. When you put the majority of reds on one team the mistakes are compounded further detracting from the game experience.  I also believe that over the longer term you would notice a change in game play experience while acknowledging that it would be harder for you to win.

but I haven't seen anything that shows those heavily unbalanced games are common enough that getting rid of them affects overall game play very much.  The only way I've seen anyone identify a large number "crap" games is by XVM.  I consider games crap that play like crap, not games that some stupid number is tells me is crap.  There is a HUGE difference.  

 

Your crap and budha's crap is not the same as what I consider crap.   Why should I get all excited about SBMM when it does absolutely nothing to improve my games, makes the game harder for me, and I will still see just as much crap? 
 

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 13 2018 - 13:04, said:

"it has been shown to happen", thank you for admitting defeat and that I'm right.  If you, and the other random mm fan boys, were right - it would be impossible for anyone to have better than 50% win rate under sbmm.  Yet we've both managed to do it.

A broken clock is also correct twice a day.  If that's how you judge success, then no wonder why you keep coming up with the conclusions you do.

"but I haven't seen anything that shows those heavily unbalanced games are common enough that getting rid of them affects overall game play very much."

REALLY?!?!  The HUNDREDS of threads made about the slot machine MM, the THOUSANDS of posts about it and how it's driving players away........THAT'S not showing you how bad it is damaging the game and driving players away?  Seriously?  How exactly far is your head in the ground?  Learning Chinese yet?  Getting rid of 40% crap, pointless battles would go a long way to making this game more than 60% fun, which when players realize, leave, especially newer players.

 

" not games that some stupid number is tells me is crap"

Those games where it's greens and blues vs reds and oranges DO play out like CRAP.  The only difference is WE KNOW WHY.  Whereas many don't, that's why you see many threads of people that clearly don't understand why.  They just complain about blowouts, very short and pointless matches etc.....If they had XVM, they'd know to blame this CRAP slot machine MM we have now.  That is the ONLY thing that separates those of us in this thread vs those in others threads.  They don't know the WHY, and we do, if they did know the WHY, they'd start blaming the actual problem, this CRAP slot machine MM that spits out 40% CRAP pointless matches. 

 

These people are so desperate to have good stats and feel special about their stats in a 13+ video GAME are sad, they'd rather the slot machine CRAP MM drive away everyone and fail than to actually enjoy the game and have fair, competitive matches every game.  



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1764 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 04:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 37052 battles
  • 5,744
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostStaz211, on Mar 13 2018 - 14:28, said:

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 13 2018 - 07:42, said:

 

I, and many other with green recents, that are clearly carrying out weight and more, that are sick of getting stuck on the red team, or being put on the other side of very imbalanced games.  We don't want auto-wins or auto-losses that are 40% of our games.  That's not a challenge, that's slot-machine based MM.

 

Those of us with Purple recents/overalls get stuck on the red team too. The difference between these two groups is that one group can turn more red team games into wins than the other group. There is no auto win or auto loss for 40% of your games. There is no slot machine. You play better, you win more games; you play worse, you lose more games. Nothing in that system is rigged. You, and others arguing your position, refuse to take accountability of your own play. If you feel like matches are out of your control to win or positively influence, then you aren't that great a player. It's that simple.

 

 

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 13 2018 - 09:34, said:

 

Yes, there are 40% of all battles are fixed by the mm.  The current mm does not balance teams based on skill.  About 40% of all battles occur between significantly mismatched teams.  The data has been presented, the data does not lie.  How does it determine the outcome before hand?  Did you really just ask that question?  If I put all pros on one team, and all noobs on the other team - I just determined the outcome before the start. Fact.

 

It has been proven with real data that sbmm will NOT push everyone to 50%.  Get with the times man...

 

First statement: You can repeat this all you want, but it doesn't make it true. The data not only does not support your position, but has proven it to be incorrect by people in your own camp. You just made the same exact arguments myself and other refuted only a few posts ago. Saying the same disproven statement over and over isnt going to change reality. 

 

Second statement: Blatantly false. In the system you are proposing there can be no outliers. Everyone will be forced towards 50%. 

 

View PostStiffWind, on Mar 13 2018 - 14:46, said:

 

You just proved yourself dumb.  Rigged DOES imply intent...in this case, to make battles end more quickly.  However, the rigging of this nature also produces other consequences.  If you actually took the time trying to understand the post BEFORE ignorantly slagging it, you might not stick your foot in your mouth so often.  Just some advice.

 

 

I take responses that contain insults and no substantive argument as admission of defeat. Thank you for your concession. 

 

"There is no auto win or auto loss for 40% of your games. There is no slot machine. You play better, you win more games; you play worse, you lose more games. Nothing in that system is rigged."

 

The most laughably and easily proven false statement you slot machine MM apologists have made yet.  When on the red team, do 4k damage, yet lose miserably.   While on the all green/blue team vs reds and oranges, stay at the front trying to get some damage, die early with 0 damage because of deathstar, still win the game 15-3. My skill had 0.....0! effect on either of those games, they were over before they started bc of the imbalance.  They were pointless to even play for all involved.

I've tracked them, it is no less than 40%, more so in off hours, it's not at all hard to track.  When it's 40%.....that is a CRAP slot machine MM.  You can deny it all you want, but too many are able to see it for what it is, especially those with XVM.

It's not 100% rigged, it's rigged 40% of the time and that's enough to drive many players away.  That's 40% of you time playing the game to be pointless.

 

Actually the data has been shown again and again to prove that 40% are over before they start.  20ish% in your favor that are pointless to play and 20% against you that are pointless to play.  Auto-wins and auto-losses thanks to this CRAP slot machine MM we have that is driving players away. 



NeatoMan #1765 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 04:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 28204 battles
  • 20,753
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 13 2018 - 22:34, said:

"but I haven't seen anything that shows those heavily unbalanced games are common enough that getting rid of them affects overall game play very much."

REALLY?!?!  The HUNDREDS of threads made about the slot machine MM, the THOUSANDS of posts about it and how it's driving players away........THAT'S not showing you how bad it is damaging the game and driving players away?  Seriously?  How exactly far is your head in the ground?  Learning Chinese yet?  Getting rid of 40% crap, pointless battles would go a long way to making this game more than 60% fun, which when players realize, leave, especially newer players.

Those hundreds of threads are probably made by the same three people, and budha accounts for almost half of them.  I don't get anywhere near 40% crap battles.  You must be doing something wrong.

 

Hang on...  my overlords have instructed me to put you on another losing streak.  Time to turn the dials..    have fun. ;)



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1766 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 04:46

    Major

  • Players
  • 37052 battles
  • 5,744
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostStaz211, on Mar 13 2018 - 15:04, said:

This thread is a good resource for helping people to understand why some blow outs happen, since people seem to be hung up on blow out matches. Read it, understand it, apply it. If you do, the matches you play will begin to make a heck of a lot more sense, as opposed to blaming losses on rigging. 

 

http://forum-console...ss-math-of-wot/

 

Most of us have read it, and understand it.  There's a big difference in the type of blowouts.  A natural blowout is going to take more than 5 mins, a blowout because of CRAP MM putting all greens and blues vs oranges and reds is gonna take 3 mins.  It's not fun for most, and that's why we're losing many players, especially newer players.



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1767 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 04:49

    Major

  • Players
  • 37052 battles
  • 5,744
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostAMSRocker, on Mar 13 2018 - 16:17, said:

Page 88 and counting... :popcorn:

 

CRAP slot machine MM apologists that know the system can be gamed will never give up their defense of it, for that reason, even if they were among the last 1000 players on NA.  They are that selfish about their "stats" in a 13+ GAME.   It's not about enjoyment, nor a challenge to them, it's about stats, in a 13+ GAME.



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1768 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 04:51

    Major

  • Players
  • 37052 battles
  • 5,744
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostNeatoMan, on Mar 13 2018 - 19:42, said:

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 13 2018 - 22:34, said:

"but I haven't seen anything that shows those heavily unbalanced games are common enough that getting rid of them affects overall game play very much."

REALLY?!?!  The HUNDREDS of threads made about the slot machine MM, the THOUSANDS of posts about it and how it's driving players away........THAT'S not showing you how bad it is damaging the game and driving players away?  Seriously?  How exactly far is your head in the ground?  Learning Chinese yet?  Getting rid of 40% crap, pointless battles would go a long way to making this game more than 60% fun, which when players realize, leave, especially newer players.

Those hundreds of threads are probably made by the same three people, and budha accounts for almost half of them.  I don't get anywhere near 40% crap battles.  You must be doing something wrong.

 

Hang on...  my overlords have instructed me to put you on another losing streak.  Time to turn the dials..    have fun. ;)

 

No, there are very varied names, and I've lost people in both clans EOR, EOR2 because of this crap MM, I actually bother to ask people why their activity has went down, and/or why they are quitting, and the CRAP MM is almost always the reason. 



Hurk #1769 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 05:13

    Major

  • Players
  • 55853 battles
  • 17,382
  • [KGR] KGR
  • Member since:
    09-30-2012

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 13 2018 - 20:23, said:

Keep that head buried FIRMLY in the ground man.  If you choose to be deaf and blind and fail to understand something so simple, there is no hope for you.  When you have a team of greens and blues vs a team of reds and oranges, gg, it's over, MM did in FACT decide that battle, not with malice, but because of a lack of programming to make a match worth playing for either side. 

We laugh at those that say "it's a rarity" or "it's so rare it's not worth fixing".  When in FACT, we see it EVERY SINGLE DAY.

i win a lot more than you. maybe work on getting good and complain less about why you are bad. 



SoTrue #1770 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 06:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 33710 battles
  • 3,302
  • [ATTOP] ATTOP
  • Member since:
    04-01-2011

View PostStaz211, on Mar 13 2018 - 14:28, said:

 

Those of us with Purple recents/overalls get stuck on the red team too. The difference between these two groups is that one group can turn more red team games into wins than the other group. There is no auto win or auto loss for 40% of your games. There is no slot machine. You play better, you win more games; you play worse, you lose more games. Nothing in that system is rigged. You, and others arguing your position, refuse to take accountability of your own play. If you feel like matches are out of your control to win or positively influence, then you aren't that great a player. It's that simple.

 

 

 

First statement: You can repeat this all you want, but it doesn't make it true. The data not only does not support your position, but has proven it to be incorrect by people in your own camp. You just made the same exact arguments myself and other refuted only a few posts ago. Saying the same disproven statement over and over isnt going to change reality.

 

Second statement: Blatantly false. In the system you are proposing there can be no outliers. Everyone will be forced towards 50%.

 

 

I take responses that contain insults and no substantive argument as admission of defeat. Thank you for your concession.

 

Because fact's don't lie.  Below is a chart of 2,000 battles in a tier 8 tank.

Note my overall win rate was 56.3%, which of course is across ALL %to win brackets.  Now if you look at just the 40-49 and 50-59 brackets (which are exactly what sbmm would be), my win rate for those brackets is 56%So no, sbmm would not MAKE everyone go to 50%.  Primarily because sbmm will never produce 50% chance to win battles.  It's not possible to do so.  sbmm would only ever create 40-60 (or whatever range we choose) battles.  Thus there is wiggle room, and better players will trend towards 60 and bad players will trend towards 40.  MOST IMPORTANTLY, however, NO PLAYER would have to be on a crappy team.  Which is all the difference in the world.



SoTrue #1771 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 06:13

    Major

  • Players
  • 33710 battles
  • 3,302
  • [ATTOP] ATTOP
  • Member since:
    04-01-2011

View PostNeatoMan, on Mar 13 2018 - 19:42, said:

Those hundreds of threads are probably made by the same three people, and budha accounts for almost half of them.  I don't get anywhere near 40% crap battles.  You must be doing something wrong.

 

Hang on...  my overlords have instructed me to put you on another losing streak.  Time to turn the dials..    have fun. ;)

 

You do get 40% crap battles, you just choose not to call 20% of them crap because you know it proves you wrong.

SoTrue #1772 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 06:14

    Major

  • Players
  • 33710 battles
  • 3,302
  • [ATTOP] ATTOP
  • Member since:
    04-01-2011

View PostNeatoMan, on Mar 13 2018 - 19:30, said:

Of course you see it every day because you are one of those players that makes your team full of red players.  Your chances of getting one of those teams is higher than the average player.  I see them far less often than you do.  In fact, I can tell you exactly how often i get them.  I have over 7k screenshots that tell me how often i get those games.  It's less than 1% of the time.

 

Even HiBan's simulation shows how rare those games are (yellow arrows and beyond), but if it makes you feel better about losing then keep posting your wild exaggerations

 

Wrong, a player is not more likely to get a red team than any other player.  He's likely to be a part of the red on his team, but Random mm produces the teams, and it does so without looking at player skill.  So if it's 10 reds on one team, and 3 reds on the other - none of those reds individually had anything to do with being on the more/less red team.

Staz211 #1773 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 06:51

    Major

  • Players
  • 27045 battles
  • 3,906
  • Member since:
    06-11-2012

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 13 2018 - 22:42, said:

 

"There is no auto win or auto loss for 40% of your games. There is no slot machine. You play better, you win more games; you play worse, you lose more games. Nothing in that system is rigged."

 

The most laughably and easily proven false statement you slot machine MM apologists have made yet.  When on the red team, do 4k damage, yet lose miserably.   While on the all green/blue team vs reds and oranges, stay at the front trying to get some damage, die early with 0 damage because of deathstar, still win the game 15-3. My skill had 0.....0! effect on either of those games, they were over before they started bc of the imbalance.  They were pointless to even play for all involved.

I've tracked them, it is no less than 40%, more so in off hours, it's not at all hard to track.  When it's 40%.....that is a CRAP slot machine MM.  You can deny it all you want, but too many are able to see it for what it is, especially those with XVM.

It's not 100% rigged, it's rigged 40% of the time and that's enough to drive many players away.  That's 40% of you time playing the game to be pointless.

 

Actually the data has been shown again and again to prove that 40% are over before they start.  20ish% in your favor that are pointless to play and 20% against you that are pointless to play.  Auto-wins and auto-losses thanks to this CRAP slot machine MM we have that is driving players away. 

 

You have proven nothing here. All you've done is state that sometimes you do well and lose, and other times you do poorly and win. That's not match rigging, that's the nature of a random system where each match is the sum of 30 independent, individual inputs. I have had 6k damage losses and 0 damage wins. Were those matches rigged? No, not at all. Were those matches decided before the match even began? No, not at all. One set of 15 players, who were randomly thrown together, outplayed another random set of 15 players who were randomly thrown together. If you're a good player, your input to the match has greater impacts than that if a bad player. .

 

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 14 2018 - 00:11, said:

 

Because fact's don't lie.  Below is a chart of 2,000 battles in a tier 8 tank.

Note my overall win rate was 56.3%, which of course is across ALL %to win brackets.  Now if you look at just the 40-49 and 50-59 brackets (which are exactly what sbmm would be), my win rate for those brackets is 56%So no, sbmm would not MAKE everyone go to 50%.  Primarily because sbmm will never produce 50% chance to win battles.  It's not possible to do so.  sbmm would only ever create 40-60 (or whatever range we choose) battles.  Thus there is wiggle room, and better players will trend towards 60 and bad players will trend towards 40.  MOST IMPORTANTLY, however, NO PLAYER would have to be on a crappy team.  Which is all the difference in the world.

 

Your SBMM idea would, as a matter of fact, force everyone towards a 50% WR. Without even getting deep into the math behind it, better players can't tend more towards 60 because the competition pool is not random, so their abilities will never be matched against the rest of the player base as a general whole. Bad players will not tend towards 40 because, the worse they play, the better the good players they will get matched with. This drags the bad player towards 50%, and weighs the good player down towards 50%. The better you play, the worse your teammates. The worse you play, the better your teammates. Will everyone have exactly a 50% WR? No, but the range of possible WRs will be much more narrow. 

 

This entire thread is a microcosm of equality of opportunity Vs equality of outcome, perfectly reflective of debates that exist today and throughout human history. As per usual, the equality of outcome camp fails to see the second, third, and fourth order effects of their proposed policies that will attempt to artificially create "fairness." They fail to see that these policies will, inevitably, break and collapse the entire system. 

 

That, and they resort to insults and baseless, dismissive assertions of being correct when confronted with a counter argument. It's hilariously reflective of larger society.



spud_tuber #1774 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 07:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 59313 battles
  • 8,840
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 13 2018 - 23:11, said:

 

Because fact's don't lie.  Below is a chart of 2,000 battles in a tier 8 tank.

Note my overall win rate was 56.3%, which of course is across ALL %to win brackets.  Now if you look at just the 40-49 and 50-59 brackets (which are exactly what sbmm would be), my win rate for those brackets is 56%So no, sbmm would not MAKE everyone go to 50%.  Primarily because sbmm will never produce 50% chance to win battles.  It's not possible to do so.  sbmm would only ever create 40-60 (or whatever range we choose) battles.  Thus there is wiggle room, and better players will trend towards 60 and bad players will trend towards 40.  MOST IMPORTANTLY, however, NO PLAYER would have to be on a crappy team.  Which is all the difference in the world.

You know what immediately jumps out at me about that chart? 

 

Average chance to win: 50.68%

Actual win rate:    56.30%

 

Win chance calculations are therefore inaccurate, and the 40-60 chance on that chart may not be representative of actual skill balanced MM.  Do you still have the raw data?  If so, try manually adjusting  all the win chances upward such that the average win chance becomes approximately the same as actual win rate and redo the above chart.

 

Quick and dirty adjustment would be to simply add the difference between the two averages to every win chance value.  More accurate methods I'm sure exist as well, as a doubt the battles with extreme win chances on either end actually need that large of an adjustment, but I can't think of a reasonable one off the top of my head.

 



StiffWind #1775 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 08:49

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 18558 battles
  • 2,076
  • [MOV] MOV
  • Member since:
    03-15-2017

View PostJer1413, on Mar 13 2018 - 22:49, said:

 

The part where one player is better than another, and subsequently wins more.

 

Well gee now...that's just dumb.  If all things are equal, then so are the players.  Duh.

 

You do understand the word "all", right?

 

 


Edited by StiffWind, Mar 14 2018 - 08:50.


StiffWind #1776 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 08:53

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 18558 battles
  • 2,076
  • [MOV] MOV
  • Member since:
    03-15-2017

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 14 2018 - 06:13, said:

 

You do get 40% crap battles, you just choose not to call 20% of them crap because you know it proves you wrong.

 

Exactly.  Neato can't take it...his mind won't accept it.  Same for a lot of naysayers in this thread.


 


 

 



StiffWind #1777 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 08:54

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 18558 battles
  • 2,076
  • [MOV] MOV
  • Member since:
    03-15-2017

View PostHurk, on Mar 14 2018 - 05:13, said:

i win a lot more than you. maybe work on getting good and complain less about why you are bad.

 

All you've got for an argument is stats?  Go back to high-school...most of us left meaningless things behind there and moved forward to join the real world.

 



sparango #1778 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 09:32

    Captain

  • Players
  • 48329 battles
  • 1,293
  • [PZB] PZB
  • Member since:
    07-13-2013
What happens to platoons that have lets say players of various skill levels. Do you just take the average skill or does the guy with the  lowest skill have to step it up against statically better opponents?

Staz211 #1779 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 10:57

    Major

  • Players
  • 27045 battles
  • 3,906
  • Member since:
    06-11-2012

View PostStiffWind, on Mar 14 2018 - 02:54, said:

 

All you've got for an argument is stats?  Go back to high-school...most of us left meaningless things behind there and moved forward to join the real world.

 

 

Your entire argument surrounds XVM % to win in a video game.....

NeatoMan #1780 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 11:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 28204 battles
  • 20,753
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 14 2018 - 00:13, said:

You do get 40% crap battles, you just choose not to call 20% of them crap because you know it proves you wrong.

Your definition of crap is totally subjective.  Why should I believe you when I can see for myself just how bad they really are?  Especially when you've never really showed an understanding of how XVM works. 

 

Your comment above about a red player not being more likely to have more red players on his team proves this.  It's why they shift their curve lower.  He guarantees one extra red player on his team every game






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users