Jump to content


Matt's Data

MM Preferential MM

  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

SoTrue #21 Posted Jun 01 2018 - 06:41

    Major

  • Players
  • 31111 battles
  • 3,302
  • Member since:
    04-01-2011

View PostJTM78, on May 31 2018 - 11:25, said:

https://www.youtube....h?v=8IcwR7jGsSU

I found this and just figured I would pass it along to the forum. It is in the comments below the video.

All data and original post to video done by a player going by Matt. Thank you Matt for finding the data and bring it forward.

QB, I'm sorry for the length of this explanation, and I'm sorry to throw some math at you, but this data isn't lying. Wargaming is. Blatantly. All data presented is from www.vbaddict.net from the last 30 days, with tanks with at least 1,000 battles. Total tanks in battles: about 12,465,220 Total Tier 8 tank appearances: 3,719,187 Total Tier 8 Preferential MM Premium (PMM) tank appearances: 176,185 Total Tier 8 Premium tank appearances: 1,793,644 Total Tier 8 standard tank appearances: 1,749,358 Tier 9 tank appearances: 1,892,439 Tier 10 tank appearances: 1,263,886 All together, Tier 8 Preferential Matchmaking (PMM) tanks make up about 1.4% of the total tanks played. Add in the tier 7 PMM tanks, and you're still just shy of 2% of the total tanks played. In fact, only two PMM tanks at any tier even made the top 100 played tanks, the SuperPershing (#65, 48K battles) and the E25 (#73, 47K battles). The KV-5, Wargaming's apparent problem child, ranks #398 with just over 6K battles played, or about 0.05% of the total. Wargaming's excuse is a complete fabrication. If 1.4% of the tanks played are disrupting the matchmaking, there's a bigger underlying problem with the matchmaking. I suspect that the problem with matchmaking is that 29% of the tanks that enter a battle are tier 8. Only 15% are tier 9, and only 10% are tier 10. The 3/5/7 matchmaking model fits this perfectly. There are twice as many tier 8 tanks played as there are tier 9 and 10 combined. Tiers 6 and 7 are 14% and 13%, respectively. The root problem with matchmaking would appear to be economics, both in-game and real-world. Tier 8 premium tanks are the most profitable, and thus, the most often played. There are more tier 8 tank appearances than any other tier, and more than half of these appearances are in premium tanks. Not coincidentally, there are 102 available tanks at tier 8, 50 at tier 9, and 56 at tier 10. Of these 102 tier 8 tanks, 56 are premium tanks. You read that correctly. There are the same number of tier 8 premium tanks as there are tier 10 tanks, and 6 more than there are tier 9 tanks. It's no wonder that there are so many more games played at tier 8. The horrible economics at tiers 9 and 10 force players to use tier 8 premium tanks to remain profitable overall. Why are there so many tier 8 premiums in-game? Look at all the specials in the premium store. Every week since 1.0 launched, it seems like there's been a different deal on a tier 8 premium. I haven't kept a close enough watch to be sure. The biggest real money makers for WG are tier 8 premiums, because the biggest credit earners for us are tier 8 premiums. Sorry, Wargaming, but your excuse just doesn't hold water.

 

+1.  good job...

H3llCat_ #22 Posted Jun 01 2018 - 14:31

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 8337 battles
  • 100
  • Member since:
    07-26-2011

View PostscHnuuudle_bop, on May 31 2018 - 23:28, said:

sorry, match maker is fine, prove your numbers other wise it is nothing more than exaggeration. I play a lot of games, and it sure seems fine to me.

Perhaps switching tiers is what is happening to you, it just feels off, last game in your tier 5 you were bottom rung, then next shazam, in your tier 8 you are bottom again. OMG, call the cops, it happened twice in a row.

 

Sorry, nothing wrong with it.

 

 

 

 

 

MM doesn't matter very much to people who spend most of their game time clicking others from a bush........ I mean the top of all tanks are pretty weak...

Edited by H3llCat_, Jun 01 2018 - 14:43.


Says #23 Posted Jun 01 2018 - 21:00

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 12155 battles
  • 746
  • Member since:
    11-16-2013

View PostscHnuuudle_bop, on Jun 01 2018 - 00:28, said:

 

I believe someone who provides actually data, rather than anecdotal numbers.

 

Just like so many other sad whines and snivels about so many things in this forum, MM is fine.

 

 

 

 

See I don't give a crap one way or the other about MM.  But don't tell me that I am 1/3 of the time top tier and 1/3 of the time bottom or I'll call you a liar.

Sure MM is fine, obviously.  If it weren't then they'd do stuff to fix it.  Things like..I duno, piss off a big chunk of their player base by removing the preferential MM part from tanks they sold with that being the selling point.  So since they are not, obviously, MM is fine.  We agree.

commander42 #24 Posted Jun 01 2018 - 21:13

    Major

  • Players
  • 25861 battles
  • 5,046
  • [T-R-P] T-R-P
  • Member since:
    07-08-2013

View PostscHnuuudle_bop, on Jun 01 2018 - 00:16, said:

 

sorry, match maker is fine, prove your numbers other wise it is nothing more than exaggeration. I play a lot of games, and it sure seems fine to me.

Perhaps switching tiers is what is happening to you, it just feels off, last game in your tier 5 you were bottom rung, then next shazam, in your tier 8 you are bottom again. OMG, call the cops, it happened twice in a row.

 

Sorry, nothing wrong with it.

 

 

when the new mm template came out 75% bottom tier is actually a very low number compared to what it actually was.  I was almost 90% bottom tier when playing tier8 when the update came out(I did keep track but not very scientifically or over a very large sample size)

so its not "oops twice in a row" it would be "oops 8 times in a row"

Flarvin #25 Posted Jun 01 2018 - 21:57

    Major

  • Players
  • 53204 battles
  • 14,714
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View PostscHnuuudle_bop, on May 31 2018 - 18:28, said:

 

I believe someone who provides actually data, rather than anecdotal numbers.

 

Just like so many other sad whines and snivels about so many things in this forum, MM is fine.

 

 

Why you posting a video on the old MM? 

 

Outside maybe failed platoons, I agree the old MM was fine. 

 

Now the current 3/5/7 with matching classes is boring and dumbs down the game. 



Nunya_000 #26 Posted Jun 01 2018 - 22:00

    Major

  • Players
  • 21111 battles
  • 13,731
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostFlarvin, on Jun 01 2018 - 12:57, said:

 

Why you posting a video on the old MM? 

 

Outside maybe failed platoons, I agree the old MM was fine. 

 

Now the current 3/5/7 with matching classes is boring and dumbs down the game. 

 

While I do agree that the 3-5-7 MM is boring, I kind of like the fact that there will never be more than 3 tanks that are +2 tier higher.

Flarvin #27 Posted Jun 01 2018 - 22:04

    Major

  • Players
  • 53204 battles
  • 14,714
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View PostNunya_000, on Jun 01 2018 - 16:00, said:

 

While I do agree that the 3-5-7 MM is boring, I kind of like the fact that there will never be more than 3 tanks that are +2 tier higher.

 

I like being able to be the alone bottom tier, can be ignored by the higher tier tanks. Plus great xp potential. 

 

But it requires one to think, which too many don’t like.



Zeedox #28 Posted Jun 01 2018 - 22:07

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 16654 battles
  • 727
  • [TESTE] TESTE
  • Member since:
    10-09-2011

View Postthe_dude_76, on May 31 2018 - 15:44, said:

...Out of 100 tanks in the queue 2 will be PMM

100 tanks = 3.3 battles

So in every 3.3 battles 2 PMM tanks will appear

 

That's nearly 2 out of 3......

 

 

So what you're saying is 2 PMM tanks appear every 3.3 battles

3.3 battles is 99 tanks roughly

So 2 PMM tanks out of 99 tanks, which is roughly 2%

 

NOT the 66% you're claiming by mixing stats...



Nunya_000 #29 Posted Jun 01 2018 - 22:26

    Major

  • Players
  • 21111 battles
  • 13,731
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostFlarvin, on Jun 01 2018 - 13:04, said:

 

I like being able to be the alone bottom tier, can be ignored by the higher tier tanks. Plus great xp potential. 

 

But it requires one to think, which too many don’t like.

 

Can't argue with that.  I never had a problem with being low tier in the old MM, but I did have the feeling of being the token low tier range target in quite a few battles.

Uncle_Napalm #30 Posted Jun 01 2018 - 22:48

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 17578 battles
  • 235
  • [XFOL] XFOL
  • Member since:
    01-21-2014

View PostscHnuuudle_bop, on May 31 2018 - 15:28, said:

the MM is PERFECT, there is nothing wrong with the match maker, the match maker is working fine.

 

you get 34% bottom tier, 33% middle tier, and 33% top tier, so, 1/3 of the time you will whine snivel, cry and whine, about being bottom tier, Exactly how it is supposed to work.

Those who lose preferential MM, boo hoo, get over it. Pay to win, and it suffers in an extremely small way. 

 

Except that's not what actually happens...



Flarvin #31 Posted Jun 01 2018 - 22:53

    Major

  • Players
  • 53204 battles
  • 14,714
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View PostUncle_Napalm, on Jun 01 2018 - 16:48, said:

 

Except that's not what actually happens...

 

Its not actually happening, because those numbers are based off the pre-3/5/7 MM. 







Also tagged with MM, Preferential MM

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users