Jump to content


Fixes to Preferential Matchmaking + Future Matchmaking Changes


  • Please log in to reply
232 replies to this topic

Prosqtor #41 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 61188 battles
  • 2,037
  • [ONION] ONION
  • Member since:
    12-16-2011

View PostYANKEE137, on Jul 26 2018 - 11:01, said:

Will be nice if Super P is no longer left behind on the battlefield by a wining team.

 

I am excited to see the specific power boost, also.  Exactly what the SuperP needs.  Just a little more get up and go along with a little better hill climbing ability would work wonders.

Mojo_Riesing #42 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:16

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 18353 battles
  • 902
  • [ACATS] ACATS
  • Member since:
    11-26-2011

I do not believe this will fix the "problems" that 3/5/7 MM has brought.  I think a previous (and incomplete) post i made was deleted but the basic comment was that this response by WG is a bit "tone-deaf".

 

A few fixes to a few tanks are not going to the core of why players dislike being the low tier in 3/5/7.  This isn't just about TierVIII.  It's about taking a TierVI medium in to battle with VII's and VIII's it is hopelessly outclassed against.  Heavies can't pen, Mediums and lights can't maneuver do to map size, view range, and corridor design....TD's often have the gun, but are nerfed too much to fight two tiers higher.

 

None of this addresses the very understandable desire of the higher tiers to selectively destroy the 7 lowest tier tanks first.  Less guns, but also more "kills" that skew the statistics that so many adore.  The low tier resorts to "gold" or premium ammo in an attempt to pen, but that restarts the whole "spammer" argument and the toxicity that goes with it.  

 

Others note that, given how the tech trees proceed, tanks of lower tiers are technologically inferior to tanks of the higher and will NEVER be fully competitive...and they should not.  They should be fighting, generally, in a group of their historical tiers...much as the military that used them recognized as they modernized.

 

In short..i wish WG would not put too much time into what looks to me to be another concept that will be DOA....dead on arrival.  This isn't about everyone being a winner, not about making everything equal and easy but it is every bit about NOT having it be a near certainty as the match opens up...that you just aren't going to have a good time, which is what playing a game is all about.

 



ISNomads #43 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:17

    Major

  • Players
  • 36532 battles
  • 2,352
  • [WHAMO] WHAMO
  • Member since:
    11-30-2013

View Postol_Cajun, on Jul 26 2018 - 08:01, said:

 

I was hoping a couple of years ago they would just advance the tiers, maybe go to 15 (playable tiers) or more. Then we could also have more modern tanks.

 

Adding too many tiers would cause problems that could speed the decline of the game and would require significant changes to the game economy and game play.

 

More tiers means the limited player base is more spread out over the tiers, causing longer queue times. If the mature player base chooses the top half of tiers to play, there may not be enough players in the low tiers to support the addition of new players in a comfortable way (long queue times because everyone is playing higher tiers).



Prosqtor #44 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:18

    Major

  • Players
  • 61188 battles
  • 2,037
  • [ONION] ONION
  • Member since:
    12-16-2011

View Postguywmustang, on Jul 26 2018 - 11:08, said:

Can you think about prioritizing 5/10 matchmaking?  Whoever thought the 3/5/7 template was the best, and still continues to think that, doesn't play this game e

It is easy to forget that 3/5/7 did help with some MM situations.  Remember when you were one of only a FEW VIIIs with a lot of IXs and Xs?  3/5/7 has some good points.  I will say that Frontline made me realize how much fun single tier MM could be.  I wish WG would run Frontline for a day here and there and vary the allowed tier.  It would be a fun change of pace.



Prosqtor #45 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:20

    Major

  • Players
  • 61188 battles
  • 2,037
  • [ONION] ONION
  • Member since:
    12-16-2011
One big problem for the MM is that between the fact that it is easy to acquire VIII tanks and the huge number of PREMIUM VIIIs, of course the MM has trouble placing all of the VIIIs. 

_Bagheera_ #46 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:20

    Major

  • Players
  • 35337 battles
  • 5,560
  • [ICON-] ICON-
  • Member since:
    12-23-2011

View PostISNomads, on Jul 26 2018 - 10:08, said:

 

Well that was incoherent.

 

For the first sentence. Yes, I agree, but that has nothing to do with player polls. Maybe do some research into self-report study or self-report bias. Data lets you know what works and what doesn't.

 

Comparing a new first-person shooter with a more niche oriented game shows that you are either not trying to be logical or you are being oblivious. One has nothing to do with the other in terms of audience, gameplay, game progression, monetization, etc.

 

A better comparison is warframe.

 

They have what is generally acknowledged as THE best monetization model of any mmo game created. I actually spend money just because I LIKE THEM.

 

I dont feel i have to to be competitive.

 

I dont feel forced to to progress in the game. I spend it BECAUSE I like the developer, their decisions, and the general lack of greed. And will continue to do so as long as they keep it up. Wargaming, if they gave up their pretty shady monetization practices, listened to us about some of the core issues of the game and stop trying to slam premiums down our throats, we would be much more willing to:

 

Play more often.

 

Spend money:

 

If they stopped with the premium tank patches, and actually just pushed some quality of life patches that did certain things like

 

Buffing power creeped tanks. Certain lines are completly obsolete now. Tell me WHY I should grind chinese medium tanks?  Why does the Wz120 still only have 3 degrees of gun depression when the OBJ 430 exists?  Why should i get a 121 when the 430 U exists that does everything better with only a slight nerf in accuracy?  Why should anyone play or grind out Japanese medium tanks?  There is NO REASON WHATSOEVER to have such poor gun handling from tier 8 to tier 10. ESPECIALLY the tier 10. none of them have any armor, nor are they particularly more mobile than their tier counterparts.  If we give up armor, and have inferior mobility we should be getting an excellent gun for those sacrifices. This also applies to the Leopards. 

 

Fixing problem tanks. The VK-B at tier 9 still basically has no frontal weakpoints unless you have high penetration gold. #makeweakpointsweakagain  Type 4s? Type 5s?

 

if i saw a patch where all these issues were addressed and other general quality of life changes that made the game FUN again (like making front line PERMANENT)  I'd be more than willing to toss money at you guys again. 

 

 



DANTE_2014 #47 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:25

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 40594 battles
  • 63
  • [K-Z] K-Z
  • Member since:
    04-18-2014
Pregunto... por que no lo ayudamos nosotros a MM?,por que no jugar contra mismo tier y maximo un tier superior? Por ejemplpo 1 vs 2... 3 vs 4... 5 vs 6 etc y si no se juntan 15 de cada lado. Se jugara con menos participantes pero de esta manera se acortara los tiempos de espera...actualmente hay tanques nivel 5 que son infinitamente inferior a un tier 7. Sin provabilidad alguna,como un tier 6,7,8 contra tier 8,9, 10  

DANTE_2014 #48 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:26

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 40594 battles
  • 63
  • [K-Z] K-Z
  • Member since:
    04-18-2014
Pregunto... por que no lo ayudamos nosotros a MM?,por que no jugar contra mismo tier y maximo un tier superior? Por ejemplpo 1 vs 2... 3 vs 4... 5 vs 6 etc y si no se juntan 15 de cada lado. Se jugara con menos participantes pero de esta manera se acortara los tiempos de espera...actualmente hay tanques nivel 5 que son infinitamente inferior a un tier 7. Sin provabilidad alguna,como un tier 6,7,8 contra tier 8,9, 10  

Blastyourasst #49 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:27

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 20727 battles
  • 13
  • [FART-] FART-
  • Member since:
    06-12-2016

View PostISNomads, on Jul 26 2018 - 11:08, said:

 

Well that was incoherent.

 

For the first sentence. Yes, I agree, but that has nothing to do with player polls. Maybe do some research into self-report study or self-report bias. Data lets you know what works and what doesn't.

 

Comparing a new first-person shooter with a more niche oriented game shows that you are either not trying to be logical or you are being oblivious. One has nothing to do with the other in terms of audience, gameplay, game progression, monetization, etc.

 

You get customer satisfaction and player engagement data by taking polls that people answer when they log in.  Make that window pop up until they take the survey or don't let them search a game till they answer the 2-5 question survey.  That is a valid collection method.  There is no better way to gauge what the people want and what will motivate them to play more and pay more.


 

 

 

 

And I compared it to fortnite because it has a player base as big as WoTs used to (110M+ players).  one of the reasons People enjoy Fortnite because they feel they can compete there with no pay-to-win bias. Everyone feels like they have a fair shot.  Every game is competing for the same customer base, so understanding their motivation and satisfaction levels is important and comparable, even across disparate game platforms.  everyone in my WoT circle plays both games and they are trending more to fortnite b/c they feel it is a fairer game right now, even if we are terrible at it.  WoT will never get back to 110M active users because of age, but declining player numbers could be stemmed by fairer playing field.  Who cares if you don't get to Seal-club tanks 2 tiers lower?  Give me single or 2 tier MM all day long.



genstallonee #50 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:29

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 8530 battles
  • 14
  • [T-RUN] T-RUN
  • Member since:
    03-27-2011
Hate to be that guy, but um, if Pref. Wasn't removed why do I have guy im my clan that's saying he ran his IS-6 and saw 10s?

Gunadie #51 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:30

    Major

  • Players
  • 42199 battles
  • 4,876
  • Member since:
    08-20-2011

Welcome to Wot.

 

Pen buffs will not exceed the intended design values of the armor scheme that encourages 

the sales of premium accounts and premium vehicles!

 

Working as intended!



U_50 #52 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:30

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 9156 battles
  • 4
  • Member since:
    07-15-2016
What about the T34? It doesn't have preferential MM, but it needs a buff just as much as the ones that do. Also, if the tanks around the T34 are buffed, but it itself is not, it will be an indirect nerf to the T34.

Gunadie #53 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:31

    Major

  • Players
  • 42199 battles
  • 4,876
  • Member since:
    08-20-2011

View Postgenstallonee, on Jul 26 2018 - 08:29, said:

Hate to be that guy, but um, if Pref. Wasn't removed why do I have guy im my clan that's saying he ran his IS-6 and saw 10s?

 

Ask for the replay!

Fjords #54 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:31

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 8752 battles
  • 81
  • [F__R] F__R
  • Member since:
    07-09-2013

This actually made my day. This keeps both the pref. status while taking into account the issue of their standing against other power creeping tier 8s and 9s.

 

For once, WG, you have really proven me wrong. If you go through with this the way you say you will, you may even change my opinion of you.



MagillaGuerilla #55 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:32

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 25314 battles
  • 4,003
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013

View PostISNomads, on Jul 26 2018 - 17:11, said:

 

That would introduce a lot of problems. This is a niche game with a limited player base. If you split the game you split the player base and speed the decline of the game.

 

I think the game is already in decline. The more they 'fix" things, the worse it gets.

Blastyourasst #56 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:32

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 20727 battles
  • 13
  • [FART-] FART-
  • Member since:
    06-12-2016

By the way, Frontline Mode has gotten rave reviews....that is Single tier MM...coincidence?????

 


 

Fix the 3 tier MM and most other problems are fixed...except the horrible T32 gun. lol



ISNomads #57 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 36532 battles
  • 2,352
  • [WHAMO] WHAMO
  • Member since:
    11-30-2013

View Post_Bagheera_, on Jul 26 2018 - 08:20, said:

 

A better comparison is warframe.

 

They have what is generally acknowledged as THE best monetization model of any mmo game created. I actually spend money just because I LIKE THEM.

 

I dont feel i have to to be competitive.

 

I dont feel forced to to progress in the game. I spend it BECAUSE I like the developer, their decisions, and the general lack of greed. And will continue to do so as long as they keep it up. Wargaming, if they gave up their pretty shady monetization practices, listened to us about some of the core issues of the game and stop trying to slam premiums down our throats, we would be much more willing to:

 

Play more often.

 

Spend money:

 

If they stopped with the premium tank patches, and actually just pushed some quality of life patches that did certain things like

 

Buffing power creeped tanks. Certain lines are completly obsolete now. Tell me WHY I should grind chinese medium tanks?  Why does the Wz120 still only have 3 degrees of gun depression when the OBJ 430 exists?  Why should i get a 121 when the 430 U exists that does everything better with only a slight nerf in accuracy?  Why should anyone play or grind out Japanese medium tanks?  There is NO REASON WHATSOEVER to have such poor gun handling from tier 8 to tier 10. ESPECIALLY the tier 10. none of them have any armor, nor are they particularly more mobile than their tier counterparts.  If we give up armor, and have inferior mobility we should be getting an excellent gun for those sacrifices. This also applies to the Leopards. 

 

Fixing problem tanks. The VK-B at tier 9 still basically has no frontal weakpoints unless you have high penetration gold. #makeweakpointsweakagain  Type 4s? Type 5s?

 

if i saw a patch where all these issues were addressed and other general quality of life changes that made the game FUN again (like making front line PERMANENT)  I'd be more than willing to toss money at you guys again. 

 

 

I agree that WG wants to build the game that they want to build and they are fairly clueless when it comes to knowing how to make 'quality of life' improvements. Having an armor arms race is just not good for anyone.

 

They mostly seem to care about monetization these days rather than increasing the player base. They can either make money by overchanrging for premium tanks or creating new forms of premium time to make things really confusing, or they can concentrate on making money by increasing the number of players playing the game. unfortunately they seem to prefer the former.

 

As long as they are still making money, they will move glacially slow with any improvements. I propose that if they were serious about MM improvements, they would focus more on data science and analytics to run models. That would greatly speed the dev process. They could simulate hundreds of thousands of battles using models trained from previously fought battles.



ISNomads #58 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:50

    Major

  • Players
  • 36532 battles
  • 2,352
  • [WHAMO] WHAMO
  • Member since:
    11-30-2013

View PostBlastyourasst, on Jul 26 2018 - 08:27, said:

 

You get customer satisfaction and player engagement data by taking polls that people answer when they log in.  Make that window pop up until they take the survey or don't let them search a game till they answer the 2-5 question survey.  That is a valid collection method.  There is no better way to gauge what the people want and what will motivate them to play more and pay more.

 

And I compared it to fortnite because it has a player base as big as WoTs used to (110M+ players).  one of the reasons People enjoy Fortnite because they feel they can compete there with no pay-to-win bias. Everyone feels like they have a fair shot.  Every game is competing for the same customer base, so understanding their motivation and satisfaction levels is important and comparable, even across disparate game platforms.  everyone in my WoT circle plays both games and they are trending more to fortnite b/c they feel it is a fairer game right now, even if we are terrible at it.  WoT will never get back to 110M active users because of age, but declining player numbers could be stemmed by fairer playing field.  Who cares if you don't get to Seal-club tanks 2 tiers lower?  Give me single or 2 tier MM all day long.

 

Polls are one of the absolutely worst ways to gather data. Polls are what you do to get a general feel before you go do actual research. It is a valid collection method but the results are often not very valid. You will could learn a lot about symptoms of a problem but may never understand the root cause that could fix things.

 

Fortnite has a completely different business model and game play so the comparison is moot. Do they have many hundreds of avatars with different characteristics that need to be resolved in order to create matches? Do they have a multi-tier grind system with multiple modules that can make it painful to progress through the game? Do some players start each match with distinct advantages over other players (analogous to crew level, equipment level, weaponry level)? Implying that reducing MM is going to move the needle even slightly in the direction of Fortnite in terms of popularity and fun is silly. Then comes the slipper slope of "remove X, it will fix the game" (X gets removed) "Wait, Y is ruining the game" and so on.



_Bagheera_ #59 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:51

    Major

  • Players
  • 35337 battles
  • 5,560
  • [ICON-] ICON-
  • Member since:
    12-23-2011

View PostISNomads, on Jul 26 2018 - 10:33, said:

 

I agree that WG wants to build the game that they want to build and they are fairly clueless when it comes to knowing how to make 'quality of life' improvements. Having an armor arms race is just not good for anyone.

 

They mostly seem to care about monetization these days rather than increasing the player base. They can either make money by overchanrging for premium tanks or creating new forms of premium time to make things really confusing, or they can concentrate on making money by increasing the number of players playing the game. unfortunately they seem to prefer the former.

 

As long as they are still making money, they will move glacially slow with any improvements. I propose that if they were serious about MM improvements, they would focus more on data science and analytics to run models. That would greatly speed the dev process. They could simulate hundreds of thousands of battles using models trained from previously fought battles.

 

That just makes no sense from a business standpoint.

 

Wargaming are NOT stupid. They are fully aware of how we feel, why and what's broken in the game. The issue with massive EA like corporations like this is that there are suits up top that pretty much tell them to SELL SELL SELL, come hell or high water. The high water is coming. 

 

The point was driven home when i was tooling about in my garage after a match. I had a VERY VERY good match in my Somua. did around 5k damage, almost 6 kills and hardly had a repair bill. Didn't touch a single round of premium ammo. Have a premium account cause im finishing up a lot of tier 10 grinds. SHould have made a fat profit right? Yeah no...barely cleared 90k after nearly 5k+ basiclaly Flawless damage. Most of it went up in ammo costs.

 

Why do my 100mm rounds cost as much as higher damage 122mm shells?

 

Why do 175 pen 122mm shels cost MORE than the 212-232mm penetrations 122mm shells fired out the STG and the OBJ 430? (seriously go look up the ammo on those)

 

Everything about this game right down to the pants on head ammo prices that make no sense anymore was designed to make you want to spend money. If the low pen 122mm shells cost something resonable tanks like the WZ111 would be incredibly proftiable, and if they didnt need to fire so much Gold...well...Cant have us pulling down over 100k profit in pub matches can we?

 

and look at how poorly they are buffing the standard pen. They wont allow these tanks to be TOO profitable, God forbid you can easily sustain the game without a premium account...


Edited by _Bagheera_, Jul 26 2018 - 17:53.


SpliterFoxHound #60 Posted Jul 26 2018 - 17:52

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 30085 battles
  • 3
  • [FURST] FURST
  • Member since:
    04-09-2015

Ok here are my honest few thoughts I have on the pref MM buffs also tanks for lessening and keeping pref mm in the game WG.

 

#1 IS6 and kv5

 The Kv-5 penetration buff compared to the Is6 penetration buff, In its current state the Kv5 has 8mm less than the Is6 from  167 to 175 so 8mm, why should the Kv5 get the same penetration buff as the Is6 when the IS6 has a bigger gun what I feel should be done is allow the Kv5 to keep the 182mm of armor and give the Is6 additional buff of 8mm so from 182mm to 190mm base pen, The 225mm of APCR pen is ok (could be more but then it ill be out of balance but I would go for 230mm so that the Type 4 view port on the left is more pen-able it still is with 217mm but you tend to bounce if not being face to face and or get a high pen roll 225mm should allow for just as much as the 230mm), Reducing the Kv5s pen by 8 after the 182mm would just defeat the purpose of the rebalance/buff so the only logical thing to do here is to buff the Is6 to 190 base pen with 225mm of APCR pen.

 

Additional suggestion for the IS6 and Kv5: For the IS6 you could add additional shells +5 to the total count from 30 shells to 35 shells,For the Kv5 I have no additional suggestions for it.

 

#2 FCM 50t and 112

I think that the FCM 50t mobility buff is good it does not need extra buffs since the gun does not struggle penning players, and the 112 maybe increase the base pen of that tank to 190 just like the IS6 and do not increase the HEAT shell velocity Heavy tanks should be in the front line do not encourage players to stay back and snipe with 250 HEAT pen and 720 shell velocity

 

Additional suggestion for the FCM 50t and 112: For the FCM could see a improved aiming time from 2.21 to 2.11, For the 112 Improve aiming time from 3.4 to 2.8 s just like with the IS6.

 

#3 WZ-111 and M6A2E1

The Wz-111 penetration buff could be increased from 182mm to 190mm just like the IS6 and 112 and the HEAT shell velocity should not be increased again to discourage HEAT sniping in Heavy tanks, TheM6A2E1 its penetration of 198 is already really good the extra 6mm of penetration would not trow it off the balance charts but it still will make other american 105s that use the same gun as it seem worse still 204mm is fine I would just not touch it, also for the M6A2E1 the traverse being buffed from 24 to 28 is called for and a good change, The M6A2E1 dispersion on the turret reduced from .18 to 16 is also a good change the tank was quite bad with its bloom

 

Additional suggestions for the Wz-111 and M6A2E1: For the Wz-111 I agree with its penetration changes but the HEAT ammunition should not have increased velocity the aiming time is fine as it is, For the M6A2E1 most of its changes are called for but there is one that I think should have extra tough put into it its armor right now as it stands the armor is pretty good but it just gets easily penetrated by high tier 330 HEAT shells, there is also a weak spot under the gun were the turret ring is I do not think you should remove said weak spot it is necessary for low tier players and even current tier 8s to be able to penetrate it its hard to hit but its a know weak spot, what does need to be improved regarding the M6A2E1's armor is the cheek armor on the tank that is what gets penetrated with 330 premium ammo when it really should not if the tanker hull downs its tank.

 

 

#4 T-34-3 and Type 59

The T-34-3 in its current status is a very competitive and good tank it should not see additional buffs said tank can get by with its 175mm of pen its mobility allows for more flanking than lets say a Is6 that happen to have a very similar 122mm except for its 250 HEAT penetration, giving a medium tank with that big of a caliber -6.5 gun depression from -5 would trow said tank out of balance and adding the additional base AP pen of 182mm will hurt the balance of a tank that received buffs when it was removed from the store in 9.22 before 1.0 Also the positive changes of the HEAT ammunition "Increase velocity of the HEAT (Premium) shell from 640 to 720 m/s" will make players snipe from far away more than they should

 

Additional suggestion for the T-34-3 and type 59: For the T-34-3 Don't buff anything on the tank it does not need a buff and said tank can get by with 175mm pf penetration and -5 gun depression put both the T-34-3 in comparison to the IS6 with their current and after buff stats and you will see that the T-34-3 out performs in most cases by quite the big margin, and for the Type 59 I agree with the current buffs no additional changes should be made.

 

#5 The T26E4 "Super Pershing" and the Jagdtiger pak 43 8,8 cm

The T26E4 is a pretty hated tank on the community but I do not feel like it should NOT be getting a buff for its 192mm of pen the tank will have more penetration than its other Pershing variants counter parts the pilot 25 M46 patton KR T95E2 and M26 Pershing all of the tanks mentioned have 192 base pen (Pershing gets 190), As for the mobility buff power to weight ratio from 9.9 to 12 h.p./t is a good change the DPM buff is also called for, Jagdtiger 8,8 cm oh what to even think of this one the tank in its current state is really bad I have to just agree with all the buffs you plan to implement

 

Additional suggestions for the T26E4 and Jagdtiger 8,8: For the T26E4 I still will insist not to increase its penetration it is good enough as it is but it could see additional power to weight 12hp/t is better but I am pretty sure than it could be increased to 12.5hp/t or even 13 hp/t, For the Jagdtiger  maybe the reverse speed can be increased to 15kmph from 14kmph and +2 additional traverse speed all the other buffs are called for after all remember that the Jagdtiger 8,8 is the worst of all the pref MM tanks.

 

 

Note: I have played with all of these tanks I am aware of their current issues I know both how to drive them and how to take them out and I am a experienced player not the best but 56% win rate (I don't care about stats tbh but the better I perform the more xp and credits I get ¯\_(ツ)_/¯) is better than most take my input as suggestions what I say is just feedback for the developers to make positive changes on the game, if you have some constructive opinions on what I have wrote go ahead and leave your 2 cents agree or disagree.

 

Edit:I know that this is about pref MM tanks but for the love of Christ buff the T-34-2 that thing is so bad in the tech tree and you are seriously thinking about buffing the T-34-3 that is really strong as it currently is, Minor type O

 

 


Edited by SpliterFoxHound, Jul 26 2018 - 18:01.





5 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 5 guests, 0 anonymous users