Jump to content


* * * - - 2 votes

[ST] Preferential Matchmaking Tanks


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

General_Lee_Miserable #21 Posted Sep 01 2018 - 16:37

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 10076 battles
  • 2,331
  • Member since:
    07-27-2013

I agree with the pen values of the 122mm being pathetic if only being raised by 7mm from current. Are you serious? That's not even a "buff". Factoring RNG, I don't see that making any difference whatsoever in live battle situations. 

 

I think the right thing to do here is to take the 175mm pen value of the D-25T (IS gun) and the 225mm pen value of the BL-9 (IS-3 gun) and split it right down the middle. I think 200 standard pen and 230 prem pen would make these tanks viable against T9 without being equal to their T8 normal MM counterparts. 



LpBronco #22 Posted Sep 01 2018 - 17:39

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 40581 battles
  • 2,536
  • [O-VER] O-VER
  • Member since:
    11-19-2010
Honestly, for me, it's not the tanks that are the issue, and I will take incremental increases in their capabilities to keep them current, but the matchmaking they see that prevents me wanting to spend more time in them and believe me with the collection of premiums I have I want to want to play them.

Mikosah #23 Posted Sep 01 2018 - 23:39

    Major

  • Players
  • 17582 battles
  • 4,123
  • Member since:
    01-24-2013

Buffing the armor of these tanks is counterproductive unless the effective values hit an extreme, which is its own problem. That's the trouble with the armor meta as a whole, its always at one of the extremes- either completely breaking the game versus lower tiers or being totally irrelevant versus same or higher tiers. Very, very seldom in between. Therefore banking on armor is practically guaranteeing misery on both sides. And it places a lot of pressure on MM due to its power to arbitrarily make this armor either game-breaking or irrelevant.

 

However, its dawned on me that even the clunkiest and most impractical tanks could be consistently playable if they possess just one trait in particular- and that's high penetration. Imagine if for instance, the JT88's APCR was its standard shell. Even if all else stayed the same, this one change alone would actually make that piece of junk at least somewhat comfortable in its niche. No way it will suddenly break the meta, but at least it'll have a point. Perhaps some other tanks have other needs as well, the T-34-3 receiving more gun depression for instance, but penetration is a prerequisite for comfort. And the current proposals for pen buffs just aren't enough.

 

To be clear, the current proposal is still way better than the previous one that involved giving these tanks normal MM, but its not ready yet. And I know I've been quoted in the past for saying "there is no blanket solution to this problem". However, penetration is the simplest and most practical answer available to us at this moment. And that in itself should be very telling as to how badly the armor meta has gotten out of hand.



shrineking1 #24 Posted Sep 11 2018 - 00:23

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 16156 battles
  • 23
  • [WIH] WIH
  • Member since:
    08-04-2011

Good Afternoon Gnomon, World of Tanks Wargaming Team, and community,

 

First I have to apologize as I have not posted enough to be able to create a new topic within the Feedback Requests. That said my topic of concern is broad enough that it encompasses even this topic so please bare with me. Just to build some notes of experience I have played the game on and off for over 6 years and honestly it is one of the fewest games that I keep coming back to for enjoyment. I am not a bad player and I have great ratings for many tanks and a over all player rating of 5400+ while I am just now starting to grind out tier 8's and higher more often. Sadly though these last few months have gotten to a point I no longer feel the game is fun.

 

So very simply I am asking that the information and idea I provide please reviewed in hopes to make the game more fun for everyone and much less agitating. Of course with the amount of changes that have come through this is not a real simple request and I am aware of that. To help though I will try to list out key elements that I find agitating and hopefully this might help direct what to work on if possible.

 

1. New Missions - While I do love these missions and the fact that it helps provide more in game modules, cash, and even tanks these missions are effective when players do not have a horrible time trying to even get one mission done. Where this starts for me is the limitation for things based on first victory of the day. Currently with the 3/5/7 system, user accounts botting, new players, and newer tank balancing it is not unheard of to hear players having less than 40% chance of victory. This means its a grind per tank to even open the chance to earn credit towards missions that require this prereq be completed. My advice is to take that restriction away. If someone has their x# for the first victory let them have that along with any conditions they fulfilled towards missions. For example if I am working on the new missions that came out for each style of tank and lets say I am working on a heavy. I have to block my health and damage a target. With a 40% chance to get victory then I am looking at probably 3 fights before I get it. Which then I have to start that mission. While this might not sound horrible that 3 is based on a average which means it very likely could be i go through 10 fights with no victory. Also note with the 3/5/7 rule this causes complications for missions like the heavy one i mentioned above. Currently I am averaging bottom tier about 70% of the time. Which means even after getting that first victory I have the potential to go through 7 fights where my chance of blocking is minimal as I am fighting tanks with much better penetration. Now while having to fight tanks in this manner is not really a problem for score, dmg, experience... it does cause issues with missions.

 

2. Victory bonuses - I love that there is a victory bonus per day, per tank, per account. This is great to allow players to play multiple tanks to get some exp and help with the grind. When there are events that say things such as place in the top 10 and get a x3 bonus but require the first victory condition to start this runs into the same issues mentioned in problem 1. Please, if it could be possible, allow these conditions to exist together. For example, we could have something along the lines of the x2 Victory and x3 for top 10. So lets say I lose and earn 300 exp but placed 3rd on my team. I still get the 900 exp. In the event this same fight occurred and I won and placed in top three it could be something like 300 base = 600 victory + 900 top 10 = 1500 exp. This makes the conditions and awards additive not all multiplicative such as if it went 300 x 6 = 1800 exp. Considering there are many tank grinds where a lot of exp is needed and with new tanks continuously coming out I dont believe a model like this should cause to many issues.

 

3. Player Accounts Botting - While i know this topic is hard to explain or prove from my end there is a good chance it could be workable on wargaming's end. Now in the event there is any question or disbelief of a botting capability in the game here is a video that may help show what I am talking about https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BM0r5XkKRc. Things like this are typically handled by a scanning software from the companies end. In most cases they are called anti cheat. I believe wargaming could do something similar to watch for control mechanic emulations from applications or even edits directly to the game files to simulate similar things. The hope is this would reduce botting and increase the play experience for players. If this is still determined as non-existent then I would ask wargaming to look very thoroughly into why majority of games have all players going to one side of the field and our found typically not taking shots at enemy players.

 

4. Match Making - This topic has been taking a major hit as of late due to preferential discussions and the 3/5/7. For this I want to make points on both but as subtopics to help read the information.

     

     a. Preferential Tanks - Some of these tanks due have a lack of stats in comparison to other premium tanks as design elements seem to change over time. A while back it seemed the model of premiums where they were not as good as normal tanks on purpose because they offered more rewards and extra crew training. Since then I feel that in the last year or maybe 2 this model has changed to create interesting, competitive, and fun premium tanks in comparison to the normal tank lines and of course still have the same rewards and crew training bonuses. While I dont have an issue with either model there does seem to be a potential problem for this as people of paid for tanks that are not the same in time and comparison. I would love to see this resolved with some easy simple solution but dont believe that really can occur. So my recommendation is attempt the redesign of those tanks to help get them there and maintain the preferential. Also those who purchased the same tanks but not receive pref should be given pref to maintain equality in the purchases.

 

    b. 3/5/7 MM - So while I do like the idea of making it where lower tiers are now heavily populating the matches to help reduce the problem that used to exist where higher tiers would just dominate the match leaving very small chances of the "underdogs" pulling off a victory I do feel the promise that if you were bottom tier for about 3 matches that you would get bumped in priority to become higher tier caused some problems by not being delivered. Now of course I understand this may very well have to do with unforeseen design elements and equations in relation to Preferential tanks and the 3/5/7 prioritizing mechanics. To resolve this I want make some notes myself that so far some of the best times I have had is in all the same tier fights. While I understand that does not give someone the feeling of having the step above someone and that could the desire I wonder if it really needs to be a 3 tier model. What if we did try doing something along the lines of 2 tier only and essentially putting the entire game into "PREFERENTIAL"? The idea here would be maybe something like 7/7 vs 7/7 or if really wanting to keep 15 perhaps 7/8 vs 7/8 and 8 being the lower tier. One final recommendation as an option if these dont work would be to reduce game sizes. instead of 3 / 5 / 7 maybe something like 1 / 3 / 4 and then limit certain tank types such as lights and spgs. This could allow for more felxability in maps and more interesting game play but that would also require no botting that makes everything go to one side any way. The potential benefit of that last solution could allow good players to even make up for players botting or those that are just new.

 

Game Modes - I believe creating more game modes such as Frontline could help boost enjoyment to the game for those that are not in clans. Currently due to losses and the supposed "New/Bad" Player expectation the recommendation I got from a ticket I created awhile back was to just play clan focused material. As clans tend to have high activity requirements this does not play well for those who have full time jobs ;) I would love to see more modes such as Frontline, Smaller team battles, more objective focus matches, challenge matches/missions, etc. 

 

Anyway I know this sounds like a lot of gripes but I am really hoping this information and ideas help improve the overall experience of the game for us all.

 

Thank you for your time,

 

Shrineking



Jesse_the_Scout #25 Posted Sep 23 2018 - 23:17

    Captain

  • Players
  • 37229 battles
  • 1,137
  • [EF-WD] EF-WD
  • Member since:
    12-22-2011
The bulk of these tentative changes make all of these tanks even more impossible to face when lower tier yet only marginally improve their capability against higher tier tanks. I don't see why the ideal WG is aiming for seems to be brick walls that are immune to lower tiers and useless against higher tiers. If I could change one thing about the Jag 8,8 it'd be to increase the APCR round to a level that is a threat to a tier 9 heavy, not improve a bunch of peripheral stats that make it even harder on tier 6 while still leaving it useless against an E-75.

cavalry11 #26 Posted Sep 26 2018 - 16:25

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 46471 battles
  • 120
  • [11BAT] 11BAT
  • Member since:
    06-24-2013

Why should any tank get preferential matchmaking? Also  when going into battle why does it always show you battling 2 tiers up? Why  not in tier 5 say tier 4 to tier 6  not tier 5 to 7?

 

 

 



Bigjohn438 #27 Posted Sep 27 2018 - 06:08

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 8770 battles
  • 5
  • [VIXEN] VIXEN
  • Member since:
    01-04-2014

Hello just wanted to  i like the game but it needs some tweeks lately.  the balance and cost are getting to be crazy. battles lately have been so out of whack  15-3 or 15-0 and so on can we fix the tier system you cant be playing against two teir higher. i can see one teir difference but two come on also teir tens need to ne with just tens.  i listen to alot of chats people are getting upset the way its been going lately.  one orther thing if x box can platoon with a group of five in there team why not the PC community. please consider this for the good of the game

thnaks again 

 



Silverleaf_Nightraven #28 Posted Sep 27 2018 - 12:14

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 12370 battles
  • 574
  • [GSH] GSH
  • Member since:
    09-25-2014

View Postcavalry11, on Sep 26 2018 - 08:25, said:

Why should any tank get preferential matchmaking? Also  when going into battle why does it always show you battling 2 tiers up? Why  not in tier 5 say tier 4 to tier 6  not tier 5 to 7?

 

 

 

 

    When I bought the Panther/M10 it said I would get pref MM. So I expect pref MM. Bait and switch tactics are for losers. The only way I would accept non Pref MM in the couple units I have is if they break them and make them crazy OP like the Defender or other broken tanks. 

Mikosah #29 Posted Sep 27 2018 - 19:03

    Major

  • Players
  • 17582 battles
  • 4,123
  • Member since:
    01-24-2013

View PostGeneral_Lee_Miserable, on Sep 01 2018 - 09:37, said:

I agree with the pen values of the 122mm being pathetic if only being raised by 7mm from current. Are you serious? That's not even a "buff". Factoring RNG, I don't see that making any difference whatsoever in live battle situations. 

 

I think the right thing to do here is to take the 175mm pen value of the D-25T (IS gun) and the 225mm pen value of the BL-9 (IS-3 gun) and split it right down the middle. I think 200 standard pen and 230 prem pen would make these tanks viable against T9 without being equal to their T8 normal MM counterparts. 

 

Let's take that idea even further- what if something like an IS-6 had the same penetration values as an IS-3. At that point you may say that the IS-6 becomes the superior tank if only because of its limited MM, But any time the two actually fight one-another directly that advantage is meaningless. And of course the IS-3 could still have slight advantages in many other aspects of performance. 

 

So to that end I say the answer is to balance limited-MM tanks as if they had normal MM but still keep the limited MM. Its a win-win for everyone, these tanks perform equally well as their standard peers, so they don't disadvantage their teams nor suffer in the current MM and simultaneously give WG something very valuable and appealing to sell to us. 



cavalry11 #30 Posted Oct 02 2018 - 00:35

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 46471 battles
  • 120
  • [11BAT] 11BAT
  • Member since:
    06-24-2013
There should be no preferential matchmaking for any tank. And please quit continuously changing tank stats.

Rolling_Pig #31 Posted Jan 11 2019 - 00:05

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 16139 battles
  • 70
  • [KLOWN] KLOWN
  • Member since:
    12-04-2015

This is exactly why wot will be doomed to failure.  For you idiots to be able to change the characteristics of a tank to suit whatever the flavor of the day is is stupid.  Inexperienced tankers are buying these and then getting placed on teams that really may need them.  They have two huge strikes against them from the start.  Not only is the tank inferior, they cant play.  So now Im on a team that will lose guaranteed and make my losing streak extend to 20 battles in a row. 

 

Until you get skill based mm this game is a joke.  You can sit around and meet with your other developer friends and think you are doing a good job by tweaking a tanks "efficiency", when you have much bigger problems to solve.  WOT is down to less than 6000 players this afternoon.  When I started it was never below 35000.  The game is dying and you guys are tweaking.   Sorry to tell the truth but you have to get a clue.



nrnstraswa #32 Posted Jan 18 2019 - 18:01

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 15807 battles
  • 439
  • [AJ] AJ
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011
So WG, what plans do you have for the pref MM premiums tiers 7 and below? 

cavalry11 #33 Posted Jan 18 2019 - 20:23

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 46471 battles
  • 120
  • [11BAT] 11BAT
  • Member since:
    06-24-2013
Simple do away  with preferential MM. Problem solved . Go to a 1 tier differential.

cloudwalkr #34 Posted Jan 18 2019 - 22:35

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 55187 battles
  • 5,314
  • [CLAWS] CLAWS
  • Member since:
    04-05-2011

View Postcavalry11, on Jan 18 2019 - 20:23, said:

Simple do away  with preferential MM. Problem solved . Go to a 1 tier differential.

 

I believe this to be a pretty close minded solution.



cavalry11 #35 Posted Yesterday, 10:30 PM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 46471 battles
  • 120
  • [11BAT] 11BAT
  • Member since:
    06-24-2013
Why is it close minded ? Just because you don't like it. I get tired of going into battle and about 85 to 90% of the time being 2 tiers down. Would it ruin your  opportunity to get a lot of easy kills?




3 user(s) are reading this topic

1 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Varrh711