Jump to content


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


  • Please log in to reply
1958 replies to this topic

NeatoMan #1921 Posted Mar 17 2018 - 21:31

    Major

  • Players
  • 27945 battles
  • 19,887
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 17 2018 - 15:07, said:

really?  how daft are you.  It's been proven over and over by the data everyone has collected that about 60% of the existing games you player occur between roughly equally skilled teams - I.E. SKILL BASED MM.   How can you not know this?  It's the bottom 20% and top 20% crap battles we are trying to get rid of.

But whenever the underdog wins it cannot possibly be a crap game.  Also, draws and games that come down to the wire cannot be considered crap games either.  Therefore a large portion of those games you label crap are in fact not crap. 

 

You claim it's not all about XVM, yet you keep retreating to that 40% value which is based solely on XVM.  You have absolutely no other identifier of crap other than what XVM tells you.  Your OCD with XVM does not deserve to be imposed onto rest of the player base.



Nixeldon #1922 Posted Mar 17 2018 - 21:43

    Captain

  • Players
  • 59824 battles
  • 1,979
  • [PRTSN] PRTSN
  • Member since:
    10-30-2011

View PostNeatoMan, on Mar 17 2018 - 15:31, said:

 Your OCD with XVM does not deserve to be imposed onto rest of the player base.

^^^This.

 



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1923 Posted Mar 18 2018 - 04:39

    Major

  • Players
  • 36646 battles
  • 5,690
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 15 2018 - 18:18, said:

View PostNeatoMan, on Mar 15 2018 - 10:48, said:

What's the difference between a blowout like the one above and one with a balanced team if they both unfold the same way? You and ejc and keep saying the unbalanced ones are faster. Now you are not. If they aren't faster, then your only distinguishing feature is XVM.

You keep going back and forth. "It's about blowouts... No, it's about XVM... No wait..."

So if your 40% of games doesn't cause many more blowouts, and the blowouts aren't any faster then what are you left with?  "XVM told me so"

 

How many times must you be told.  HOW is just as important, if not more important the END RESULT.   If a team has NO CHANCE to win, and gets rolled, THAT'S COMPLETELY different than having a chance and blowing it.

View PostStiffWind, on Mar 15 2018 - 12:16, said:

 

My point is they start out with an advantage already, regardless of skill, due to the nature of the way WoT "arranges" this game.  Stick to the point, instead of trying to deflect into a tangent...it will help with your apparent lack of understanding.

 

Exactly.

View PostNixeldon, on Mar 15 2018 - 12:30, said:

Getting steamrolled in 4 minutes is fine as long as the teams fit your idea of balanced, as you interpret it from XVM color matching. Steamrolls are bad if a stronger team does it outside of your idea of balanced, as you interpret it from XVM color matching. If a team is a heavy underdog and steamrolls a team, we should ignore it.

 

TrueBudha,"The only thing that matters is color-coded matches."

 

 

Sad.  Attempting to deflect the truth with nonsense.  The 'xvm colors', are accurate measures of individual skill, and thus a teams skill when looked as a whole.  When random mm puts WAY  more skill on one team, random mm has 'rigged' that battle.  Color is not the issue, stacking actual players skill on one team is.

View PostStaz211, on Mar 15 2018 - 13:11, said:

 

1) Repeatedly claims that matches end in 2-3 minutes. Calls others idiots or liars for not believing him.

2) Posts a video of a match ending in 5 minutes.

3) Asserts that a match ending in 5 minutes proves his point that matches end in 2-3 minutes.

 

Somehow, I'm not even surprised.

 

Additionally I will, once again, post a link to this thread so that you can better understand how and why "blowouts" happen, and why the tide can turn so quickly in a battle: http://forum-console...ss-math-of-wot/

 

dumbest response of this whole 95 page saga.  Is shown a video with the sole purpose of showing that a battle 'can be over' before the last tank is killed.  It's spelled out minute by minute - AND HE STILL DOESN'T GET IT.   Sad.  Go back and watch that video and let me know if there was any way the enemy team was going to pull back a win after the 13 minute mark.

View PostNeatoMan, on Mar 15 2018 - 14:48, said:

So we've narrowed crap games down to blowouts caused by the MM (i.e. unbalanced teams).

 

Using budha's 40-60% win chance range as balanced games, I only get 10% of my games as "crap".    Even if I go by daRock's exaggerated 8-15 margin for blowouts, combined with budha's 40-60% balanced range, I still only get 18% of my games as "crap".

 

So where are the my other 22% crap games coming from?

 

Thanks for proving us right once again.  You freely admit 20% of your battles are crap.  The other 20% come at the other end of the bell curve.  Gifted wins are as boring as guaranteed losses are frustrating.  Case in point, the vid I posted just above this post.  I literally drove forward, hit the fire button, repeat.  There was no skill involved in that battle.  BORING.  That's where the full 40% come from.

 

 

They know this man, they pretend to not understand in a sad attempt to prop up their argument in favor of this terribad, riggable joke of a crap slot machine MM that we have now.



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1924 Posted Mar 18 2018 - 05:20

    Major

  • Players
  • 36646 battles
  • 5,690
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View Post_Tsavo, on Mar 16 2018 - 02:09, said:

View PostStiffWind, on Mar 16 2018 - 02:56, said:

 

only you put most of the bad players on one side, and most of the better players on the other.  Now, how is that fair?  Please explain.

 

 

Because every game that G platoon is on my team, there's a game where they're on the enemy team.

 

Yeah, a single match may feel unfair, but it was assembled without malice or ill intent.  

 

A compressed win rate is no bueno, and not fair to the playerbase.

 

Except that's not true.  If you have friends, and play in a platoon, they are MUCH more likely to be on the other side as the MM has platoon matching.



Hurk #1925 Posted Mar 18 2018 - 05:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 55601 battles
  • 17,376
  • [KGR] KGR
  • Member since:
    09-30-2012

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 17 2018 - 21:20, said:

Except that's not true.  If you have friends, and play in a platoon, they are MUCH more likely to be on the other side as the MM has platoon matching.

i think you are missing a small point, we keep trying to hammer into you, but you are missing. 

 

you arent the purple platoon's counter.

we are. 

 

Its not any fun for me to always have that purple platoon on the enemy team. i dont want to carry you, neither do they. 

this is why ladder based play would be best, not skill based. so that you would never see that purple platoon, until your skills came some place close enough to affect the outcome of that match. 

 

but, yet again, i will repeat, the NA server does not have the population to support that type of split in the playerbase. 



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1926 Posted Mar 18 2018 - 06:14

    Major

  • Players
  • 36646 battles
  • 5,690
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostNixeldon, on Mar 16 2018 - 07:22, said:

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 15 2018 - 21:18, said:

How many times must you be told.  HOW is just as important, if not more important the END RESULT.   If a team has NO CHANCE to win, and gets rolled, THAT'S COMPLETELY different than having a chance and blowing it.

You aren't concerned with the HOW, just the colors. In that same match you keep posting, if XVM had told you the teams were balanced, it would be a non-issue.  The only time you ever present a concern in any match, regardless of how it plays, is if the colors don't match. 

 

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 15 2018 - 23:47, said:

Simple, easy to see, irrefutable evidence, yet they will still find a way to deny it.  They don't realize that by denying that it happens as often as we see it happening, then they area REALLY hurting their case that random MM effects everyone the same.  I'm not saying the MM is different for everyone, I'm saying that given how they've been dishonest in other ways, that they are being dishonest in this way as well.   Their reasoning for doing so it quite obvious.

Irrefutable evidence of what? That colors didn't match?

 

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 15 2018 - 23:51, said:

Nice attempt to confuse the issue when it is NOT complicated at all.  The only time it isn't over with quickly, is when you have the couple of "good" players on your auto-loss that stay in the back, farm damage and run away at the first sign of trouble so they can again snipe and keep their wn8 for the battle up.  They know it's a loss and just want to salvage their wn8.  EASY to see for anyone that isn't WILLFULLY BLIND.

Here you go with your "good" players vitriol again. 

 

Irrefutable evidence of what 40% of battles are like.  Absolutely a waste of time.  It was over from the very start, if you can't see it, it's because you refuse to see it.  I.E. willfully blind. 

I say "good"....sarcastically because they don't try to help the team at all when they know it's a loss, they run away to pad their stats, whereas actual good players would have tried.



Nixeldon #1927 Posted Mar 18 2018 - 07:01

    Captain

  • Players
  • 59824 battles
  • 1,979
  • [PRTSN] PRTSN
  • Member since:
    10-30-2011

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 18 2018 - 00:14, said:

Irrefutable evidence of what 40% of battles are like.  Absolutely a waste of time.  It was over from the very start, if you can't see it, it's because you refuse to see it.  I.E. willfully blind. 

I say "good"....sarcastically because they don't try to help the team at all when they know it's a loss, they run away to pad their stats, whereas actual good players would have tried.

He showed 1 damned battle. That is evidence of what one battle is like. Why is one anecdotal post indicative of 40% of matches, but all the other anecdotal posts don't count? Like a said a few posts earlier, you ignore anything that contradicts your spurious claims. 

 

I seriously doubt you have any idea what a good player does.

 

 



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1928 Posted Mar 18 2018 - 08:41

    Major

  • Players
  • 36646 battles
  • 5,690
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostNeatoMan, on Mar 16 2018 - 14:15, said:

View Postda_Rock002, on Mar 16 2018 - 16:10, said:

One end/side of the curve, about 20% of the battles, has 'team 1' ridiculously more skillful than 'team 2'.    On the other end/side of the curve, also 20%, the MM has 'team 2' ridiculously more skillful than 'team 1'.  

Your use of "ridiculously more skill" is debatable.   If the matches are indistinguishable by their game play then they aren't ridiculously more skilled.   That 40% number you all keep bantering about comprises many games that are very competitive.  You just don't like who is winning.

Just had 2 out of 4 battles 2-15, and you said it's not common.  7 reds and rest mostly orange, other team mostly greens.  Funny when you guys say it's not common.



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1929 Posted Mar 18 2018 - 09:25

    Major

  • Players
  • 36646 battles
  • 5,690
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostHurk, on Mar 17 2018 - 20:36, said:

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 17 2018 - 21:20, said:

Except that's not true.  If you have friends, and play in a platoon, they are MUCH more likely to be on the other side as the MM has platoon matching.

i think you are missing a small point, we keep trying to hammer into you, but you are missing. 

 

you arent the purple platoon's counter.

we are. 

 

Its not any fun for me to always have that purple platoon on the enemy team. i dont want to carry you, neither do they. 

this is why ladder based play would be best, not skill based. so that you would never see that purple platoon, until your skills came some place close enough to affect the outcome of that match. 

 

but, yet again, i will repeat, the NA server does not have the population to support that type of split in the playerbase. 

 

We're not missing it at all, we don't want to be carried and we don't want stupid auto-loss matches.

We know that NA doesn't have the playerbase to do brackets, they waited to long and too many have left the game.  We want to make it to where the crap slot machine MM isn't running players away from the game like it is now.  If 60% of battles being okay in current MM, there's nothing wrong with making it to where 90% are okay. 



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1930 Posted Mar 18 2018 - 09:27

    Major

  • Players
  • 36646 battles
  • 5,690
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostNixeldon, on Mar 17 2018 - 22:01, said:

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 18 2018 - 00:14, said:

Irrefutable evidence of what 40% of battles are like.  Absolutely a waste of time.  It was over from the very start, if you can't see it, it's because you refuse to see it.  I.E. willfully blind. 

I say "good"....sarcastically because they don't try to help the team at all when they know it's a loss, they run away to pad their stats, whereas actual good players would have tried.

He showed 1 damned battle. That is evidence of what one battle is like. Why is one anecdotal post indicative of 40% of matches, but all the other anecdotal posts don't count? Like a said a few posts earlier, you ignore anything that contradicts your spurious claims. 

 

I seriously doubt you have any idea what a good player does.

 

 

 

That "one battle" is what 40% of games are like, and that is bad, and that is why many leave the game.

When I die, I always watch the good players to see what they do and how they play.  That is how I learned the difference between good players and stat padders. 



NeatoMan #1931 Posted Mar 18 2018 - 13:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 27945 battles
  • 19,887
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 18 2018 - 02:41, said:

Just had 2 out of 4 battles 2-15, and you said it's not common.  7 reds and rest mostly orange, other team mostly greens.  Funny when you guys say it's not common.

I can find just as many battles (anecdotes in your case) that are balanced yet turn out the exact same way.  You aren't going to change that with SBMM.

 

Block Quote

They know this man, they pretend to not understand in a sad attempt to prop up their argument in favor of this terribad, riggable joke of a crap slot machine MM that we have now.

 No it's just you all going around and around saying   "It's about XVM" ,..    "Wait, it's about blowouts"...   "No, it is about XVM".....  "No wait...", 

 

You have to keep doing that because you keep running into the problem where one criteria for "crap" game is not the same as the other, yet only one (XVM) seems to support the need for SBMM



_Gungrave_ #1932 Posted Mar 18 2018 - 13:54

    Major

  • Players
  • 44178 battles
  • 16,299
  • [-SRP-] -SRP-
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011
I'm wondering if I should start calling you guys necromancers because you keep beating this dead horse and the reviving it just so you can beat it to death again.

NeatoMan #1933 Posted Mar 18 2018 - 14:25

    Major

  • Players
  • 27945 battles
  • 19,887
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 15 2018 - 21:18, said:

How many times must you be told.  HOW is just as important, if not more important the END RESULT.   If a team has NO CHANCE to win, and gets rolled, THAT'S COMPLETELY different than having a chance and blowing it.

Or maybe since both balanced and unbalanced games both lead to blowouts it isn't related to team balance as much as you think. 

 

You have never tracked that sort of information.  All you've tracked is wins and losses as it relates to XVM.  Therefore your entire premise is predicated on the END RESULT.  You keep saying it isn't, but everything you got points in that direction.



spud_tuber #1934 Posted Mar 18 2018 - 16:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 57117 battles
  • 7,860
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View Post_Gungrave_, on Mar 18 2018 - 06:54, said:

I'm wondering if I should start calling you guys necromancers because you keep beating this dead horse and the reviving it just so you can beat it to death again.

Better than a new thread every few days from SoTrue or one of the other usual suspects.  At least it's mostly contained.



EmperorJuliusCaesar #1935 Posted Mar 19 2018 - 04:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 36646 battles
  • 5,690
  • [EOR] EOR
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostNeatoMan, on Mar 18 2018 - 04:52, said:

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 18 2018 - 02:41, said:

Just had 2 out of 4 battles 2-15, and you said it's not common.  7 reds and rest mostly orange, other team mostly greens.  Funny when you guys say it's not common.

I can find just as many battles (anecdotes in your case) that are balanced yet turn out the exact same way.  You aren't going to change that with SBMM.

 

Block Quote

They know this man, they pretend to not understand in a sad attempt to prop up their argument in favor of this terribad, riggable joke of a crap slot machine MM that we have now.

 No it's just you all going around and around saying   "It's about XVM" ,..    "Wait, it's about blowouts"...   "No, it is about XVM".....  "No wait...", 

 

You have to keep doing that because you keep running into the problem where one criteria for "crap" game is not the same as the other, yet only one (XVM) seems to support the need for SBMM

 

That's not what we've said at all, not even once.  You seem to have trouble understanding statements that people make, even when they say the same thing over and over and over.  Each time, YOU are the one that is misunderstanding, and I don't think it's an accident, you're trying to confuse the issue and make it less coherent.  I'll help you with that.

EACH AND EVERY TIME WE HAVE SAID THE SAME THING.  XVM DOES NOTHING MORE THAN TELL YOU THE "WHY" OF WHY CRAP GAMES HAPPEN.  ONE TEAM IS FAR MORE SKILLED THAN THE OTHER AND THERE ARE FAR TOO MANY OF THOSE GAMES HAPPENING.  SO MANY, IN FACT, THAT IT IS DRIVING PEOPLE FROM THE GAME, ESPECIALLY NEWER PLAYERS.  THAT IS NOT GOOD FOR THE LONG TERM HEALTH OF THE GAME. 

WHEN THERE'S SO MANY GAMES THAT ARE 15-2, EVEN PEOPLE WITHOUT XVM KNOW SOMETHING IS WRONG, THEY JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS, NOR UNDERSTAND IT.  THOSE OF US WITH XVM KNOW EXACTLY WHY IT IS HAPPENING, A CRAP.....SLOT MACHINE MM THAT MAKES 60% GOOD BATTLES AND 40% TRASH. 

 

This has been said over and over, yet you few alone, pretend to not understand it.  So many are afraid of fair and balanced matches even though roughly 60% are already just that.  I see the lack of character on NA server daily, so I'm not at all surprised by this. 



NeatoMan #1936 Posted Mar 19 2018 - 04:32

    Major

  • Players
  • 27945 battles
  • 19,887
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostEmperorJuliusCaesar, on Mar 18 2018 - 22:11, said:

That's not what we've said at all, not even once.  You seem to have trouble understanding statements that people make, even when they say the same thing over and over and over.  Each time, YOU are the one that is misunderstanding, and I don't think it's an accident, you're trying to confuse the issue and make it less coherent.  I'll help you with that.

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH...

Nobody has ever made the link between blowout games and unbalanced teams....  EVER!    The two are not as exclusively related as you like to think.   Most of the 15-2 games I get occur with balanced teams.  It's simply the nature of the game.   You're going to get them regardless.  All SBMM does is change who wins those 15-2 games.

 

btw I only get a 0.1323 correlation coefficient between margin and team balance (as measured by XVM).  That's barely anything.


Edited by NeatoMan, Mar 19 2018 - 05:00.


SoTrue #1937 Posted Mar 19 2018 - 04:39

    Major

  • Players
  • 32046 battles
  • 3,302
  • Member since:
    04-01-2011

View PostNeatoMan, on Mar 17 2018 - 12:31, said:

But whenever the underdog wins it cannot possibly be a crap game.  Also, draws and games that come down to the wire cannot be considered crap games either.  Therefore a large portion of those games you label crap are in fact not crap.

 

You claim it's not all about XVM, yet you keep retreating to that 40% value which is based solely on XVM.  You have absolutely no other identifier of crap other than what XVM tells you.  Your OCD with XVM does not deserve to be imposed onto rest of the player base.

 

Um, yes.. even when the underdog wins it can still be a 'crap' game.  I've done it myself on occasion.  My team is horrible, but I still squeak out a win.  It's almost entirely luck though.  Or a major heavy carry.  Just because a grossly mismatched battle ends 'close', doesn't negate the fact that it was grossly mismatched.  That's bs logic right there.  Heck, just this week in the NCAA, the number 16 upset the number 1.  But it's the first time in NCAA history.  Does that suddenly mean every time the 16 seed has a good chance to upset the number 1 seed?  Of course not.  For all eternity, the number 1 seed is going to have more than good odds to win against the number 16 seed.  You are trying to prove something wrong using a tiny exception.  That is why you are wrong.

-

Also, my 'range' of 40-60% is not 'based on' xvm.  All xvm does is show me the relative skill of each team - and THAT SKILL RATING IS REAL.  That one team has 8 greens, and the other team has 2 - that's all random mm's fault.  And it's a REAL skill imbalance.  To deny otherwise is to deny reality.


 



NeatoMan #1938 Posted Mar 19 2018 - 04:49

    Major

  • Players
  • 27945 battles
  • 19,887
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 18 2018 - 22:39, said:

Um, yes.. even when the underdog wins it can still be a 'crap' game.  I've done it myself on occasion.  My team is horrible, but I still squeak out a win.  It's almost entirely luck though.  Or a major heavy carry.  Just because a grossly mismatched battle ends 'close', doesn't negate the fact that it was grossly mismatched.  That's bs logic right there.  Heck, just this week in the NCAA, the number 16 upset the number 1.  But it's the first time in NCAA history.  Does that suddenly mean every time the 16 seed has a good chance to upset the number 1 seed?  Of course not.  For all eternity, the number 1 seed is going to have more than good odds to win against the number 16 seed.  You are trying to prove something wrong using a tiny exception.  That is why you are wrong.

-

Also, my 'range' of 40-60% is not 'based on' xvm.  All xvm does is show me the relative skill of each team - and THAT SKILL RATING IS REAL.  That one team has 8 greens, and the other team has 2 - that's all random mm's fault.  And it's a REAL skill imbalance.  To deny otherwise is to deny reality.

See?  now you are falling back on only XVM as your sole indicator of crap (or team balance if you want to call it that).  You don't care how the game plays.  You can't enjoy a nailbiter because of XVM.   That's BS.  

 

Do you think they feel dejected going to the NCAA tournament, even as 16th seeds?  Most teams are elated to get there, no matter what the seed.

 

btw, so nice of you all to gather on that other website to plan your responses.



SoTrue #1939 Posted Mar 19 2018 - 04:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 32046 battles
  • 3,302
  • Member since:
    04-01-2011

View PostNeatoMan, on Mar 18 2018 - 19:49, said:

See?  now you are falling back on only XVM as your sole indicator of crap (or team balance if you want to call it that).  You don't care how the game plays.  You can't enjoy a nailbiter because of XVM.   That's BS. 

 

Do you think they feel dejected going to the NCAA tournament, even as 16th seeds?  Most teams are elated to get there, no matter what the seed.

 

btw, so nice of you all to gather on that other website to plan your responses.

 

Um, I have one flashlight.  It lights up a dark room.  Why do I need another source of light?

-

xvm shines a clear light on the fallacies of random mm.  Why do I need another metric to show it fails?

-

Also, what are you blathering on about with 'the other website'?  Have you been reduced to blaming the 'dark web' for your failures now???



NeatoMan #1940 Posted Mar 19 2018 - 05:05

    Major

  • Players
  • 27945 battles
  • 19,887
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostSoTrue, on Mar 18 2018 - 22:59, said:

Um, I have one flashlight.  It lights up a dark room.  Why do I need another source of light?

-

xvm shines a clear light on the fallacies of random mm.  Why do I need another metric to show it fails?

Because your SBMM is just balance for balance sake.  It doesn't do a damn thing about what most people are complaining about (blowouts).

 

All your SBMM does is change who wins the game.  You claim it's not about the END RESULT,  However, wins and losses ARE the END RESULT.  Your are exclusively focusing on the END RESULT without even realizing it.

 

Block Quote

Also, what are you blathering on about with 'the other website'?  Have you been reduced to blaming the 'dark web' for your failures now???

 I see all.  ;)

 






2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users