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

Jer1413 #1781 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 12:03

    Captain

  • Players
  • 48111 battles
  • 1,542
  • [RR13] RR13
  • Member since:
    02-24-2013

View PostStiffWind, on Mar 14 2018 - 07:49, said:

 

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?

 

 

 

You're the one who stated "all things being equal". I was just clarifying that obviously they aren't. Some players are better than others and naturally give their team an advantage.

 

Balancing teams artificially just allows poor players to win as much as good players. How is that fair?

 

When things like tier, tank type and maps are balanced it is an attempt to take these out of the equation as far as one team having an advantage over the other.

 

When you balance skill, you also remove it from the equation so it is now meaningless as to the outcome. So your skill has no bearing on whether you win or lose. Who wants to play a game like that? I strive to get better at the game so I can win more, it's as simple as that.

 



_Tsavo_ #1782 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 13:17

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 46482 battles
  • 19,859
  • [RELIC] RELIC
  • Member since:
    02-16-2011

Our understanding of fair is an equal starting position, Jer1413.

 

Theirs is an understanding of fair to be an equal result.  

 

 

That's the fundamental reason for most of the bickering back and forth here.



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1783 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 13:40

    Major

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

View PostHurk, on Mar 13 2018 - 20:13, said:

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. 

 

People always go to stats, even when you have green recents and put out more than average.  Always try to make your argument about stats, yet you fail because that's exactly the problem, the game doesn't take stats into account when making teams.



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1784 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 13:41

    Major

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

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 13 2018 - 21:11, said:

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.

 

They know this, they are just afraid that they aren't as good as their stats say and theirs will fall. 



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1785 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 13:51

    Major

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

View PostStaz211, on Mar 13 2018 - 21:51, said:

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.

 

If they weren't "rigged" then you more than likely wouldn't have won with 0 damage, if you were put on an AWFULLY imbalanced team, you wouldn't have done 6k and still lost, with a balanced team, the others would have gotten enough for a win.  So they are rigged for auto-win and auto-loss, you just don't want to accept it.  Not out of malice, out of bad programming. 

He just showed you that wn% wasn't affected, yet you still laughingly deny it.  Wow....

 

The "effects" of fair matches are easy to calculate, many people will not keep leaving, newer players will stick around instead of being driven away by a CRAP slot machine MM that we have now.  Once words spreads or people check back in with the game to see any improvements, many will come back to enjoy fair battles and not the CRAP slot machine MM they remember.

As for how it relates to society.  Just wow, yeah, it's soooooo bad for all of us to invest in the education of others in our country.  It would be so bad to educated people for today's jobs and have them become tax payers instead of a drain on the economy.  It would be so bad to invest in people instead of in the Prison Industrial Complex.  People don't turn to crime because they want to, they do so because they have no hope of anything else, or the jobs that are available, don't pay enough to even afford a place to rent to live, so they turn to crime to make up the difference.  Not unlike the US does, can't pay it's bills.....oh, just attack this country and use it's resources to help make up the difference.  The others, attack legally for doing the same thing you do, hack in and steal what they've researched.  Oh, and instead of educating your own, bring in foreigners that will work for less so the greedy can have even more.



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1786 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 13:54

    Major

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

View PostNeatoMan, on Mar 14 2018 - 02:52, said:

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

 

It's not about believing him.....it's about believe the hundreds of threads and thousands of posts about it.  That and all the people that openly state it's why they leave the game.  Even WG openly admitted that MM was a problem and promised to keep making changes until they get it right.  Everyone but a small majority understand the problem.  The others are burying their heads in the sand because they don't want fair fights, they are afraid it will show their true skill and their stats will come to reality.



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1787 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 13:56

    Major

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

View Post_Tsavo, on Mar 14 2018 - 04:17, said:

Our understanding of fair is an equal starting position, Jer1413.

 

Theirs is an understanding of fair to be an equal result.  

 

 

That's the fundamental reason for most of the bickering back and forth here.

 

There's not a equal starting position.  40% of battles are over before they start, more in off hours.  Everyone can see this except you few people. 

It's about the game stopping it's loss of players, especially new ones.



Kliphie #1788 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 13:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 32986 battles
  • 5,554
  • [GFLC] GFLC
  • Member since:
    07-20-2012

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 14 2018 - 07:54, said:

 

It's not about believing him.....it's about believe the hundreds of threads and thousands of posts about it.  

 

Volume of evidence does not trump quality of the evidence and the same half dozen people shouting on both sides is hardly representative of the player base.  



Kliphie #1789 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 13:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 32986 battles
  • 5,554
  • [GFLC] GFLC
  • Member since:
    07-20-2012

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 14 2018 - 07:56, said:

 

There's not a equal starting position.  40% of battles are over before they start, more in off hours.  Everyone can see this except you few people. 

It's about the game stopping it's loss of players, especially new ones.

 

George Will had a famous quote on baseball that applies to WoT very well.

 

Block Quote

 "Every team goes to spring training knowing it is going to win 60 games, knowing that it is going to lose 60 games, and they play a whole season to sort out the middle 42. If you win 10 out of 20 games you are by definition mediocre. If you win 11 out of 20 games, you win around 89 games and you have a good chance to play in October."

 

 



Staz211 #1790 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 14:14

    Major

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

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 14 2018 - 07:51, said:

 

If they weren't "rigged" then you more than likely wouldn't have won with 0 damage, if you were put on an AWFULLY imbalanced team, you wouldn't have done 6k and still lost, with a balanced team, the others would have gotten enough for a win.  So they are rigged for auto-win and auto-loss, you just don't want to accept it.  Not out of malice, out of bad programming. 

He just showed you that wn% wasn't affected, yet you still laughingly deny it.  Wow....

 

The "effects" of fair matches are easy to calculate, many people will not keep leaving, newer players will stick around instead of being driven away by a CRAP slot machine MM that we have now.  Once words spreads or people check back in with the game to see any improvements, many will come back to enjoy fair battles and not the CRAP slot machine MM they remember.

As for how it relates to society.  Just wow, yeah, it's soooooo bad for all of us to invest in the education of others in our country.  It would be so bad to educated people for today's jobs and have them become tax payers instead of a drain on the economy.  It would be so bad to invest in people instead of in the Prison Industrial Complex.  People don't turn to crime because they want to, they do so because they have no hope of anything else, or the jobs that are available, don't pay enough to even afford a place to rent to live, so they turn to crime to make up the difference.  Not unlike the US does, can't pay it's bills.....oh, just attack this country and use it's resources to help make up the difference.  The others, attack legally for doing the same thing you do, hack in and steal what they've researched.  Oh, and instead of educating your own, bring in foreigners that will work for less so the greedy can have even more.

 

I typically avoid insults in my responses, but this is just about one of the most patently idiotic things I have read on these forums, and that's saying something. 

 

I would not win a 0 damage game because the MM rigged the match, I would win because there were 14 other individuals who contributed enough to win the match. This may be hard to comprehend, but it's not all about you. Shocker, I know, but the MM doesn't care about you; your team doesn't care about you; the opposing team doesn't care about you. You are just one of thirty players competing for damage, kills, position, and ultimately the win. Sometimes a few of those faceless individuals will work together in a manner somehwat resembling teamwork, and often times those moments account for  your blow out. 

 

As for the rest of your asinine post; thank you for giving me exactly what I wanted. I have now confirmed the exact type of person I am dealing with, and your inability to comprehend the fundamental difference between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome makes perfect sense. 

 

So predictable.



Staz211 #1791 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 14:21

    Major

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

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 14 2018 - 07:56, said:

 

There's not a equal starting position.  40% of battles are over before they start, more in off hours.  Everyone can see this except you few people. 

It's about the game stopping it's loss of players, especially new ones.

 

The MM is completely random. There is literally no better definition of equality of opportunity. 

 

This isn't about stopping the loss of players; there is a whole host of other chronic fixed that WG could do to fix that. This is about wanting to be rewarded with wins that you did not earn; this is about the fundamental inability for some people to take ownership of their own actions, behaviour, and skill level. This is about demanding something you did not earn at the expense of others. 



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1792 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 14:30

    Major

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

View PostKliphie, on Mar 14 2018 - 04:58, said:

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 14 2018 - 07:54, said:

 

It's not about believing him.....it's about believe the hundreds of threads and thousands of posts about it.  

 

Volume of evidence does not trump quality of the evidence and the same half dozen people shouting on both sides is hardly representative of the player base.  

 

It's not about the half dozen that stick it out arguing their positions.  It's about the hundreds of people post about it, hundreds that quit because of it, many of which don't have XVM which is the ONLY reason they don't understand WHY it is happening.  But they DO KNOW something is wrong, very wrong.



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1793 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 14:35

    Major

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

View PostStaz211, on Mar 14 2018 - 05:14, said:

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 14 2018 - 07:51, said:

 

If they weren't "rigged" then you more than likely wouldn't have won with 0 damage, if you were put on an AWFULLY imbalanced team, you wouldn't have done 6k and still lost, with a balanced team, the others would have gotten enough for a win.  So they are rigged for auto-win and auto-loss, you just don't want to accept it.  Not out of malice, out of bad programming. 

He just showed you that wn% wasn't affected, yet you still laughingly deny it.  Wow....

 

The "effects" of fair matches are easy to calculate, many people will not keep leaving, newer players will stick around instead of being driven away by a CRAP slot machine MM that we have now.  Once words spreads or people check back in with the game to see any improvements, many will come back to enjoy fair battles and not the CRAP slot machine MM they remember.

As for how it relates to society.  Just wow, yeah, it's soooooo bad for all of us to invest in the education of others in our country.  It would be so bad to educated people for today's jobs and have them become tax payers instead of a drain on the economy.  It would be so bad to invest in people instead of in the Prison Industrial Complex.  People don't turn to crime because they want to, they do so because they have no hope of anything else, or the jobs that are available, don't pay enough to even afford a place to rent to live, so they turn to crime to make up the difference.  Not unlike the US does, can't pay it's bills.....oh, just attack this country and use it's resources to help make up the difference.  The others, attack legally for doing the same thing you do, hack in and steal what they've researched.  Oh, and instead of educating your own, bring in foreigners that will work for less so the greedy can have even more.

 

I typically avoid insults in my responses, but this is just about one of the most patently idiotic things I have read on these forums, and that's saying something. 

 

I would not win a 0 damage game because the MM rigged the match, I would win because there were 14 other individuals who contributed enough to win the match. This may be hard to comprehend, but it's not all about you. Shocker, I know, but the MM doesn't care about you; your team doesn't care about you; the opposing team doesn't care about you. You are just one of thirty players competing for damage, kills, position, and ultimately the win. Sometimes a few of those faceless individuals will work together in a manner somehwat resembling teamwork, and often times those moments account for  your blow out. 

 

As for the rest of your asinine post; thank you for giving me exactly what I wanted. I have now confirmed the exact type of person I am dealing with, and your inability to comprehend the fundamental difference between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome makes perfect sense. 

 

So predictable.

 

If the teams are balanced, and you do 0 damage, you have a much lower chance of winning that match.  If however the match is, like 40% of our current matches, very imbalanced to the point it's over before it starts....then it's still very likely you'll be carried to the win.  Only an idiot couldn't understand that. 

Yeah, because 47% of your entire populace being on govt aid is a good thing.  Great job with "job creation" and the "land of opportunity".  Great country, no wonder so many with the means to live elsewhere.....do...



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1794 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 14:41

    Major

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

View PostStaz211, on Mar 14 2018 - 05:21, said:

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 14 2018 - 07:56, said:

 

There's not a equal starting position.  40% of battles are over before they start, more in off hours.  Everyone can see this except you few people. 

It's about the game stopping it's loss of players, especially new ones.

 

The MM is completely random. There is literally no better definition of equality of opportunity. 

 

This isn't about stopping the loss of players; there is a whole host of other chronic fixed that WG could do to fix that. This is about wanting to be rewarded with wins that you did not earn; this is about the fundamental inability for some people to take ownership of their own actions, behaviour, and skill level. This is about demanding something you did not earn at the expense of others. 

 

40% of battles(math has been shown) being over before they start is in no way fair, that's 40% of the time playing wasted. 

Unicoms OPENLY ADMIT in their youtube videos to gaming the current system, so no, that is not fair. 

It IS about stopping the loss of players, especially newer ones(would stop seal clubbing to a great extent), even WG has acknowledged it and said they will keep changing MM until they get it right.  Nice theory you have there at the end, too bad it's all wrong and extremely selfish, you'd rather keep losing players until there is no NA server rather than fight fair battles, we get it.



da_Rock002 #1795 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 14:59

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 9697 battles
  • 3,767
  • Member since:
    11-24-2016

View PostStaz211, on Mar 14 2018 - 08:21, said:

 

The MM is completely random. 

 

 

Completely random? 

Do you have a record of your scores?   Keep one for a while and let us know how often you are on the losing side of 15-7 and worse outcomes.   Check out how often you're on the winning side versus the losing side.   You'll see WoT random at it's finest.       You might notice that over ~95% of the 15-7 and worse scores have one thing in common.   One team is half full of players with similar stats to you.   The other team has maybe one or two.   You'll also see the losing side is chock full of newbies.   Check out how often you see a blowout loss.        


 

If you think about it, that isn't completely random.    It's the signature of WoT/WG's daily ration of battles.   40% of them suck.   And not a bit of 'completely' in that random.

View PostStaz211, on Mar 14 2018 - 08:21, said:

 

 

 

 This is about wanting to be rewarded with wins that you did not earn; this is about the fundamental inability for some people to take ownership of their own actions, behaviour, and skill level. This is about demanding something you did not earn at the expense of others.

 

 The MM is broken.   Why?    Who cares why?    Oh wait, the people who benefit from it care big time for an obvious reason.   They are being rewarded with wins they think they deserve.   And don't want the golden goose to quit laying their golden eggs.    So they can 'earn' some more stature in broken matchups.

View PostStaz211, on Mar 14 2018 - 08:21, said:

 

 This is about demanding something you did not earn at the expense of others.

 

Talk about 'something you did not earn'......    Early on in your career, you DID EARN your WR.   And congratulations on that.   Apparently WoT hasn't handed out the crap of today from the beginning.   But TODAY it feeds newbies an entirely different diet it feeds the blues.    When the 30 players in a match are about 3/4 tomatoes and newbies, and 1/2 of them are on one side, that 1/2 is going to see mostly bad-broken matchs.   The 1/4 is going to see GOOD-broken for them.       So it makes sense you demand there is nothing wrong.  

And what is really happening here is blues demanding that nothing needs fixing...  that random really does work the way WoT/WG spits it out...  that the people reporting the breakage want something given to them.   (They really want real random given to everyone.)


 

What they want is for WoT to stop TAKING from new players and giving it to the group that needs it the least.



NeatoMan #1796 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 15:17

    Major

  • Players
  • 28198 battles
  • 20,711
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 14 2018 - 07:54, said:

It's not about believing him.....it's about believe the hundreds of threads and thousands of posts about it.  That and all the people that openly state it's why they leave the game.  Even WG openly admitted that MM was a problem and promised to keep making changes until they get it right.  Everyone but a small majority understand the problem.  The others are burying their heads in the sand because they don't want fair fights, they are afraid it will show their true skill and their stats will come to reality.

If they all follow the same logic and understanding of XVM that budha displays, then they are no more believable than he is.   It's like asking for advice on how to play a tank.  I'm not going to believe the hordes of tomatoes who have demonstrated a complete lack of understanding on how to properly use that tank.   SBMM won't make anything "right" other than redistributing wins and losses.


Edited by NeatoMan, Mar 14 2018 - 15:26.


EmperorJuliusCaesar #1797 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 15:23

    Major

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

View PostNeatoMan, on Mar 14 2018 - 06:17, said:

If they all follow the same logic and understanding of XVM that budha displays, then they are no more believable than he is.   It's like asking for advice on how to play a tank.  I'm not going to believe the hordes of tomatoes who have demonstrated a complete lack of understanding on how to properly use that tank.   SBMM won't make anything "right" other than redistributing wins and losses.

 

Stopping the waste of 40% of matches that are pre-decided by our current CRAP slot machine MM is a good thing.  XVM shows the WHY, the CRAP MM.  If people don't have it, they still know that something is VERY wrong, they just don't know why.  XVM just gives you proof that it's MM causing the bs 40% of matches.

NeatoMan #1798 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 15:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 28198 battles
  • 20,711
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 14 2018 - 09:23, said:

Stopping the waste of 40% of matches that are pre-decided by our current CRAP slot machine MM is a good thing.  XVM shows the WHY, the CRAP MM.  If people don't have it, they still know that something is VERY wrong, they just don't know why.  XVM just gives you proof that it's MM causing the bs 40% of matches.

And you wonder why I shouldn't believe the hundreds of posts...  they are mostly hyperbole and wild exaggerations,  just like that 40% number.

 

here's another example:

Block Quote

Do you have a record of your scores?   Keep one for a while and let us know how often you are on the losing side of 15-7 and worse outcomes.   Check out how often you're on the winning side versus the losing side.   You'll see WoT random at it's finest.       You might notice that over ~95% of the 15-7 and worse scores have one thing in common.   One team is half full of players with similar stats to you.   The other team has maybe one or two.   You'll also see the losing side is chock full of newbies.   Check out how often you see a blowout loss.       

 I know from my 7k screenshots and following my games that this is nowhere near to what actually happens.   Should I believe what I have collected and see before my eyes, or someone who refuses to post his data and/or collection methods for comparison?  Why should I believe people who always refuse to share or discuss their data, or don't even understand the fundamentals behind it?  If they refuse to follow the scientific method, I refuse to accept their bombastic pronouncements.



Nixeldon #1799 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 16:20

    Major

  • Players
  • 60881 battles
  • 2,280
  • Member since:
    10-30-2011

View Posteteam, on Mar 11 2018 - 22:03, said:

​Nowhere in my post have I suggested SBMM would reduce blowouts.  And yes underdog teams do win some games and if I was to take a rough guess in an 80-20 split I would expect the underdog team to win 20% of the games.  No real surprize there.  In my experience unbalanced matches are quite common.  What constitutes an unbalanced match is subjective and we all probably have differing opinions on that point.

The point is that the random MM does influence the outcome of the game in particular when there is large discrepancies in team skill.  So it doesn't pick winners and losers it just influences the outcome just as player skill influences the outcome.

I know. You can't seem to explain what it would do, you just "believe" it would be an obvious improvement.  EJC said that blowouts were obviously what was meant by crap matches none of you objected to his definition. Not one person has explained what a crap match is except for EJC. Even though his assertions are 100% incorrect, at least he offered that much.

 

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 12 2018 - 00:11, said:

"they don't play much different" is a straw man argument. 

Stop using the straw man allegation. You clearly don't know what it means.

 

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 12 2018 - 00:11, said:

Whether it's a blowout, or over quickly is not the point.  

It is precisely the point! Everyone, except for you, is claiming that SBMM will make the game play better. Short matches and blowouts are frequently recurring complaints that are attributed to a dislike of a random mm and those exact attributes are what are claimed to be alleviated by skill balancing, except by you

 

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 12 2018 - 00:11, said:

 He really needs to track 'when it was really over'.  And we all know what I mean by this.  When you are down 6 tanks and 4k hp at the two minute mark, it's over.  Whether it's a blowout, or over quickly is not the point.  The point is, the better team is going to crush the less skilled team - and that part is fixed.

No. We all don't know what you mean by this. I spent the past few days reviewing my last 500 matches and installed XVM for reference. None of them fit your 6 tanks/4k hp within two minutes. I had a total of two matches that ended under 4 minutes. Using WN8 as the prediction(slightly better than win rate alone), we lost a 61% CTW to being capped at 11:34 and won a 54% CTW by 15-3 at 11:12.

 

A match is over when it is over and the rest of what you stated is garbage.

 

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 12 2018 - 00:11, said:-

Also, MM does pick winners and loser.  Just no every battle as you incorrectly imply.  In about 40% of the battles, MM does pick the winner.  In about 60% of the battles, individual skill and effort push a players win rate over time.

I never implied the MM picked any or all winners and losers. That is the domain of you, Stiffy, Shadora, eteam, et al.

 

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 13 2018 - 13:02, said:

The real data is the data collected by members of the community.  The data shows the distribution of the types of battles in terms of skill imbalance.  The data has shown about 20% of the battles are fixed in your favor, about 20% are fixed against you, and about 60% are between roughly equal teams. 

I have tracked matches, I have seen various data types and none of it supports what you are claiming.

 

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.

You first have to understand what is fact. Your tracking did nothing but demonstrate the accuracy of the Chance To Win calculation. Instead of attempting to understand why the prediction was off by almost 6% you jumped to a conclusion you hadn't tested. 6% is quite significant as far as player win rate distribution is concerned.

 

1) XVM was underrating your team weight based on your account when you started tracking. You had a lower xTE rating in the M6 and a lower win rate. You had a low average tier and a lower account WN8. Assuming your performance normalized with enough remaining battles to allow for random factors and stat correction, then XVM CTW was very inaccurate in the range it should have been most accurate.

 

View Postda_Rock002, on Mar 14 2018 - 08:59, said:

Do you have a record of your scores?   Keep one for a while and let us know how often you are on the losing side of 15-7 and worse outcomes.   Check out how often you're on the winning side versus the losing side.   You'll see WoT random at it's finest.       You might notice that over ~95% of the 15-7 and worse scores have one thing in common.   One team is half full of players with similar stats to you.   The other team has maybe one or two.   You'll also see the losing side is chock full of newbies.   Check out how often you see a blowout loss.      

Yes. I have a record and I have screen shots. There is no correlation in my data to anything you have ever posted.



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1800 Posted Mar 14 2018 - 16:54

    Major

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

View PostNeatoMan, on Mar 14 2018 - 06:29, said:

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 14 2018 - 09:23, said:

Stopping the waste of 40% of matches that are pre-decided by our current CRAP slot machine MM is a good thing.  XVM shows the WHY, the CRAP MM.  If people don't have it, they still know that something is VERY wrong, they just don't know why.  XVM just gives you proof that it's MM causing the bs 40% of matches.

And you wonder why I shouldn't believe the hundreds of posts...  they are mostly hyperbole and wild exaggerations,  just like that 40% number.

 

here's another example:

Block Quote

Do you have a record of your scores?   Keep one for a while and let us know how often you are on the losing side of 15-7 and worse outcomes.   Check out how often you're on the winning side versus the losing side.   You'll see WoT random at it's finest.       You might notice that over ~95% of the 15-7 and worse scores have one thing in common.   One team is half full of players with similar stats to you.   The other team has maybe one or two.   You'll also see the losing side is chock full of newbies.   Check out how often you see a blowout loss.       

 I know from my 7k screenshots and following my games that this is nowhere near to what actually happens.   Should I believe what I have collected and see before my eyes, or someone who refuses to post his data and/or collection methods for comparison?  Why should I believe people who always refuse to share or discuss their data, or don't even understand the fundamentals behind it?  If they refuse to follow the scientific method, I refuse to accept their bombastic pronouncements.

 

I tracked them via pen and paper because that's easier than tabbing out of the game and risk a client crash.  My results were between 41-42%, slightly more than 40%.

He's shown you his data and it clearly shows that 40% are crap pointless battles that are driving people away from the game. 

The CRAP slot machine MM is bad for everyone except those that admit to gaming the system to inflate their stats.  When it's admitted to, that says a lot, when people play lower tiers(seal clubbing) to pad their stats, they know what they are doing, they are gaming the system to inflate their stats and look "good" at a 13+ GAME.  It's no wonder why some don't want it change, they don't want a fair fight.






4 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users