Jump to content


Tired of 15-2 and 15-4 battles? Looking for more 15-13 or 15-11 outcomes that are challenging?


  • Please log in to reply
67 replies to this topic

I_QQ_4_U #61 Posted Sep 19 2018 - 16:27

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 17790 battles
  • 3,447
  • Member since:
    10-17-2016

Even if they had a skill based MM I doubt it would make much of a difference. It's the nature of the type of game it is, if it did anything it would likely lead to much longer games that could still end in a blowout. Besides, I kept track during a 100 game stretch I had 27 that were more than a ten tank difference, not as much of a problem as some make it out to be.



Warmongergearhead #62 Posted Sep 19 2018 - 17:12

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 19411 battles
  • 407
  • Member since:
    10-14-2012

RNG/MM decides to "skill balance" some games for me by making my tanks unable to hit the side of a barn and giving me 10 tomatoes that do zero damage or landed one shot of HE.

I don't have a problem with the tomato part, the game has to balance the win rate somehow, but having a 4-skill crew just go stupid and not hit anything, and/or getting zero damage critical hits off the sides of light tanks, is super frustrating.


 

 



da_Rock002 #63 Posted Sep 19 2018 - 18:04

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 7540 battles
  • 2,969
  • Member since:
    11-24-2016

View PostNunya_000, on Sep 19 2018 - 10:25, said:

 

My theory is that you feel the game needs to be "skill balanced" is because you seldom feel that your contribution changes the outcome.  You seldom make an impact.

 

I am just an average player, however, I feel my contribution helps change the outcome quite often.  I never feel I am in a "predetermined" battle, because I know that if I play smart, I CAN make a difference.  Even when the skill balance is not in favor of my team, I still feel I can make a difference.   Though, sometimes I succeed and sometimes I fail at making a difference.  I would guess that better players than myself are even less intimidated at any skill imbalance.

 

 

That's an interesting assumption.

Why exactly do you feel the need to air your theory of my motives?



Nunya_000 #64 Posted Sep 19 2018 - 18:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 21033 battles
  • 12,816
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View Postda_Rock002, on Sep 19 2018 - 09:04, said:

 

 

That's an interesting assumption.

Why exactly do you feel the need to air your theory of my motives?

 

Because this is a public forum and I can.  If you do not like it, you have the option to put me on "ignore".

da_Rock002 #65 Posted Sep 19 2018 - 18:17

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 7540 battles
  • 2,969
  • Member since:
    11-24-2016

View PostI_QQ_4_U, on Sep 19 2018 - 10:27, said:

Even if they had a skill based MM I doubt it would make much of a difference. It's the nature of the type of game it is, if it did anything it would likely lead to much longer games that could still end in a blowout. Besides, I kept track during a 100 game stretch I had 27 that were more than a ten tank difference, not as much of a problem as some make it out to be.

 

 

It appears you haven't noticed but neato's charts have proclaimed much of the MM output are evenly matched battles.    In fact they are for a simple reason.   Random distribution of anything winds up with the middle of the bell curve being "balanced".    It happens with everything that is ignored or allowed to do as it pleases.   You really should have noticed WG's constant reminders they don't take skill into consideration. 


 

What happens thanks to their inattention is a fair portion of our battles are evenly matched.    You know the argument over what percentage of WoT's battles are blowouts hovers around 40%, right?    Astoundingly, that means around 60% of the battles are skill-balance-filtered.    That 60% are the matchups that DIDN'T wind up with the WoT/WG signature team imbalance.


 

All along, you've been playing skill-balanced matchups ~60% of the time.    Pretty decent, aren't they...…  


 

You do realize that 60% is exactly what you say isn't going to happen, and say really produces as many rolfstomps as biased matchups produce.    :facepalm:



NeatoMan #66 Posted Sep 19 2018 - 18:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 25918 battles
  • 17,837
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View Postda_Rock002, on Sep 19 2018 - 12:17, said:

What happens thanks to their inattention is a fair portion of our battles are evenly matched.    You know the argument over what percentage of WoT's battles are blowouts hovers around 40%, right?    Astoundingly, that means around 60% of the battles are skill-balance-filtered.    That 60% are the matchups that DIDN'T wind up with the WoT/WG signature team imbalance.

Your connection of blowouts to skill imbalance is weak.

 

Block Quote

All along, you've been playing skill-balanced matchups ~60% of the time.    Pretty decent, aren't they...…  

 They aren't much different than the rest.  Without looking at the skill of the players I wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

 

and you keep saying this isn't only about margins of victory, but look at the title.  Look what he's complaining about.  Almost every thread complaining about blowouts uses that as a measure of a blowout, and you'll notice they don't complain about 15-7 battles or 15-6 battles either.


Edited by NeatoMan, Sep 20 2018 - 13:57.


spud_tuber #67 Posted Sep 19 2018 - 18:41

    Major

  • Players
  • 51872 battles
  • 6,463
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View Postda_Rock002, on Sep 19 2018 - 07:14, said:

 

 

The two are mutually exclusive.    thanks for noticing


 

MM ignoring skill in it's processing allows that influence to do what all do when ignored, it spreads itself across the entire player distribution.   MM has nothing to do with placing players based on skill.


 

When player skill influences is ignored and thereby allowed to create rolfstomps when those skilled players happen to be concentrated on one team as happens so often, that group of players most certainly see a different battle than the newbies concentrated on the other team.    Those rolfstomps occur one way for the newbies and another for the 'blessed'. 


 

The two are completely different.   yes.....

 

The two happen at the same time.   yes....

 

The two combined are why so many say the MMing they get sucks. 

The fact you don't understand why the views are mutually exclusive is also telling.

 

When MM ignores skill it will distributes skill randomly, both in individual battles and in the long run.  It is the long run effects you are misinterpreting. 

 

Over enough battles, assuming a player plays unplatooned, the average skill of his 14 teammates will be the same as the average skill of his 15 opponents.  Indeed, if you did bar charts of his teammates and opponents,  both bar charts would look the same because not only are his teammates and opponents of equal average skill, they are distributed the same. Further, these two things would look almost the same for any two players playing the same tiers, regardless of the player's individual skill.

 

Even more so, if you kept track of how many battles that player had, for instance,  5 above average teammates and no above average opponents, this number would once again closely match for all players at the same tiers.

 

All of the above is due to simply the nature of random selection.   With enough samples(ie, battles) the sampled data(team mate and opponent skill) will match the distribution and average of the entire set(all players playing at the relevant tiers).

 

As such, a good player doesn't get any more games where he has 5 good teammates and no above average opponents than a bad player.  Since you've claimed that they do, and since such is impossible under a skill random system, which you claim MM is, you've made mutually exclusive claims. 



I_QQ_4_U #68 Posted Sep 19 2018 - 18:59

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 17790 battles
  • 3,447
  • Member since:
    10-17-2016

View Postda_Rock002, on Sep 19 2018 - 18:17, said:

 

 

It appears you haven't noticed but neato's charts have proclaimed much of the MM output are evenly matched battles.    In fact they are for a simple reason.   Random distribution of anything winds up with the middle of the bell curve being "balanced".    It happens with everything that is ignored or allowed to do as it pleases.   You really should have noticed WG's constant reminders they don't take skill into consideration. 


 

What happens thanks to their inattention is a fair portion of our battles are evenly matched.    You know the argument over what percentage of WoT's battles are blowouts hovers around 40%, right?    Astoundingly, that means around 60% of the battles are skill-balance-filtered.    That 60% are the matchups that DIDN'T wind up with the WoT/WG signature team imbalance.


 

All along, you've been playing skill-balanced matchups ~60% of the time.    Pretty decent, aren't they...…  


 

You do realize that 60% is exactly what you say isn't going to happen, and say really produces as many rolfstomps as biased matchups produce.    :facepalm:

 

I can't make heads or tails of that mess. Like I said, I doubt it would make much of a difference if they did have a skill based MM.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users