Jump to content


Why can't we have +/- 1 matchmaking?

match making

  • Please log in to reply
83 replies to this topic

Crypticshock #21 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 18:34

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 17928 battles
  • 253
  • [TROBS] TROBS
  • Member since:
    03-13-2011

In order to get the games to go +/-1 MM all regions would have to be in agreement. SEA/EU/NA/RU. Every tank would have to be rebalanced for it. It's a lot of work for something that may or may not work. You'd be better off creating WoT:2.

 

Instead, thou, you could create things to alleviate such concerns.

 

1: You could, which we think there are doing, fix the MM to give us what was promised when it was first introduce; a tracker that tracks our bottom tier games and put us in middle/top tier to better reduce the number of times we are bottom tier.

2: Create events/modes that allow you to play only the same tier tanks. Which they started with the BETA TEST of Frontlines, which is said to be back in early 2019 in a more permanent role. Also they might be doing that with Grand Battles:8 - Just depends if we are able to queue into Grand Battle as a mode.

3: PvE Scenarios. That's pretty much what the Halloween Event was about. Test the bots and servers for future PvE.

 

Like I have always said, 3/5/7 isn't the problem. The amount of times we are forced to be the 7 is the problem.


Edited by Crypticshock, Nov 08 2018 - 18:36.


pafman #22 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 18:36

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 34746 battles
  • 428
  • [-_-] -_-
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011

View PostPipinghot, on Nov 08 2018 - 16:33, said:

There are lots of answers floating around the forums, but the real reason is money.

 

Wargaming has stated (many times) over the years that the +/-2MM encourages people to spend money because it makes them want to progress up the tech tree faster. They've been saying this since the game first went live in 2011, but that hasn't stopped players from making up answers having to do with server population, time to make battles, and other stuff. This is a popular myth, but there is absolutely no relationship between the server population and the choice of +/-1 or +/-2 MM, it's entirely based on Wargaming's belief that the game makes more money with a +/-2 MM than it would with a +/-1 MM.

 

There are plenty of people on the NA server who argue that this isn't true, they're certain that +/-1 MM would make players happier and they'd spend more money, but of course they have no way of providing evidence of that point of view. The bottom line is that WG believes that +/-2 makes more money, so that's the system they use.

 

all the while server population keeps dropping. just a statement, i see no correlation......

_Red_Saaryn_ #23 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 18:58

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 15889 battles
  • 736
  • [-IKR-] -IKR-
  • Member since:
    08-09-2015

View PostYves9, on Nov 08 2018 - 15:50, said:

As a newcomer, i'm just wondering why can't we have matchmaking within one tier.

 

I mean, I totally agree that even with current matchmaking, tanks at bottom tier can do a lot, deal damage, spot, flank, snipe...all sorts of things. I also don't deny the fact that tanks within the same tier can have a huge power difference and are not perfectly balanced. But you have to admit that top tiers normally perform better than bottom tiers, and data can definitely show that top tiers in a game have higher average damage. My question is, if people don't enjoy current matchmaking that much, why can't we have one that has only one tier difference?

 

I understand the fact that it may make the matchmaking taking longer time, but by how much? For me, I'd rather wait for a while than running a bottom tier tank (i mostly play tier 3-5 though). Besides, even when dealing the highest damage as top tier, I don't enjoy it; but when I was one shot as a bottom tier, it really frustrates me...well I guess i'm just bad lol

They cant do that because that would make you happy and god doesnt want you to be Happy...

 

 

No seriously, wg is a capitalistic company (weird to say that for a russian company) if they let you have a +- 1 mm ot would mean tou wouldn't need to buy premium tanks to make money for premium rounds, it would mean you wouldnt need to buy an OP tank or a PMM (preferential matchmaking) tank. Therefore no profit for then. Also it would be boring to have it nice all the time. 

 

There must be a balance between *#&$¥@;#£ annoying and fair mm. So you are frustrated enough to buy premiums but not frustrated enough to rage quit the game (they are making it so more people rage quit).

 

They need to make half games fair mm and hslf games annoying bullpoop but with the system right now. 90% are bullpoop for most tiers (except tier 10) and 99% bullpoop in tier 8 due to most those battles vs OP annoying tier 10 


Edited by _Red_Saaryn_, Nov 08 2018 - 18:58.


Grouchy_Tomato #24 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 19:11

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 28058 battles
  • 623
  • [CDN] CDN
  • Member since:
    02-22-2011

View PostPipinghot, on Nov 08 2018 - 11:33, said:

There are lots of answers floating around the forums, but the real reason is money.

 

Wargaming has stated (many times) over the years that the +/-2MM encourages people to spend money because it makes them want to progress up the tech tree faster. They've been saying this since the game first went live in 2011, but that hasn't stopped players from making up answers having to do with server population, time to make battles, and other stuff. This is a popular myth, but there is absolutely no relationship between the server population and the choice of +/-1 or +/-2 MM, it's entirely based on Wargaming's belief that the game makes more money with a +/-2 MM than it would with a +/-1 MM.

 

There are plenty of people on the NA server who argue that this isn't true, they're certain that +/-1 MM would make players happier and they'd spend more money, but of course they have no way of providing evidence of that point of view. The bottom line is that WG believes that +/-2 makes more money, so that's the system they use.

 

This 

iAmEbola #25 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 19:32

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 11754 battles
  • 6,724
  • Member since:
    02-06-2015

View Post_Resolute14_, on Nov 08 2018 - 10:35, said:

Exactly how long have you worked for Wargaming?

 

4400 years.

 

Got anything new besides that same stupid line?

 

No?  Didn't think so.  

 

Heck, I still don't like it when they changed the Scout MM.  I absolutely loved taking my AMX 12 t in against Tier IX tanks.  BRING THAT BACK!



Crypticshock #26 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 19:36

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 17928 battles
  • 253
  • [TROBS] TROBS
  • Member since:
    03-13-2011

Wait, they said +/-2 MM encouraged people to spend money to move up the tech tree... back in 2011 when it was +/- 4 MM? I smell a lie.

I mean, if they have been saying it at +/- 4 MM, then moved it to +/-2 MM... then there is already a precedent to move to +/- 1 MM since it's just natural progression ;)


Edited by Crypticshock, Nov 08 2018 - 19:37.


theSparatan117 #27 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 20:00

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 10031 battles
  • 721
  • [F0XEY] F0XEY
  • Member since:
    12-26-2013

Honestly +1/-1 Would just lead to better playing games all around. There would be a lot less cannon fodder from Top Tier melting Bottom Tier... which would make it harder for Top Tier to get their damage in needed to keep from going negative (especially in 8+). At the end of the day, Bottom tier is really only cannon fodder meant to give the Top tier something to shoot at and feel good during the game in a target rich environment (given that most Tier 10 guns can pen just about anything at Tier 8). If you change that, the Russian crowd would loose their crap... so... they won't. WG literally only cares about it's Russian audience... anyone outside Russia is SoL..

 

Maybe we'll see it one day... but... that won't be anytime soon. We'll probably see PvE before we see that... given how fast the population rates keep falling on the NA server..



KTVindicare #28 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 20:05

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 5611 battles
  • 19
  • Member since:
    05-30-2013

View PostLesser_Spotted_Panzer, on Nov 08 2018 - 15:08, said:

The reason why it is done is because WG want to expose you to the next bigger/better tank, in order to encourage you to grind out the next tank in the line. On the whole, this helps drive revenue for WG.

 


 

However, I would argue that the same could be achieved with a lower tier spread, which would be less stressful on the players.


 

Note that the current MM is unfair in the sense that it does not record how often you are bottom tier, and at some tiers you end up being bottom 90% of the time. WG are currently in the process of fixing this, just don't hold your breath though.

 

On the flip side, I constantly find myself quitting this game and coming back because I can only handle so many curb stomps in Tier 8 before I get fed up and stop playing.

 

Stock Grinds are bad enough, it's even worse to have to grind 40k xp for a gun that penetrates anything while also fighting Tier X tanks.

 

There are already SO many incentives for monetization in this game already. The matchmaking doesn't need to continue to be one of them. If anything, the more enjoyable games it creates will get players to play more and thus spend more.



iAmEbola #29 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 20:37

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 11754 battles
  • 6,724
  • Member since:
    02-06-2015

Cracks me up.  

 

+/- 1mm would make it that much easier for unicums to dominate.  

 

Then the next cry would be...

 

+/-0 MM, +1 is too hard, I can't be effective, I can't do anything, all I am is cannon fodder...bla bla bla, whine whine whine.

 

Holy cow this is getting old. 



spud_tuber #30 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 20:45

    Major

  • Players
  • 52474 battles
  • 6,651
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View PostiAmEbola, on Nov 08 2018 - 13:37, said:

Cracks me up.  

 

+/- 1mm would make it that much easier for unicums to dominate.  

 

Then the next cry would be...

 

+/-0 MM, +1 is too hard, I can't be effective, I can't do anything, all I am is cannon fodder...bla bla bla, whine whine whine.

 

Holy cow this is getting old. 

Not if they play almost exclusively T9 & 10 where they benefit more from 2 tier MM than they are hurt by it.  Otherwise, yes, 1 tier MM will give greater overall influence to the individual player, for good or bad, than the current MM in which tiers 4-8 see many more +2 tanks than -2.



iAmEbola #31 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 20:49

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 11754 battles
  • 6,724
  • Member since:
    02-06-2015

View Postspud_tuber, on Nov 08 2018 - 13:45, said:

Not if they play almost exclusively T9 & 10 where they benefit more from 2 tier MM than they are hurt by it.  Otherwise, yes, 1 tier MM will give greater overall influence to the individual player, for good or bad, than the current MM in which tiers 4-8 see many more +2 tanks than -2.

 

And nobody but me sees this as a bad thing?  



GeoMonster #32 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 21:05

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 30169 battles
  • 388
  • [MUG-D] MUG-D
  • Member since:
    06-13-2016

View PostGeorgePreddy, on Nov 08 2018 - 09:58, said:

Why can't we have +/- 1 matchmaking?

 

What does your reply have to do with the OPs question?  Once again you spew diarrhea that does not answer the question.

 



spud_tuber #33 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 21:12

    Major

  • Players
  • 52474 battles
  • 6,651
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View PostiAmEbola, on Nov 08 2018 - 13:49, said:

 

And nobody but me sees this as a bad thing?  

I see it as neutral.   Maybe a little widening of player win rate distribution at mid tiers, probably a little narrowing of win rate distribution at T9&10.  No more top tier with 7 -2 tanks to stomp, no more bottom tier spending more time trying to avoid engaging the top 3 than engaging your opposite 7. 

 

I could be wrong, and be misjudging the size of the effects, of course.  But really,  I see no great need for +-1MM, either, because the positives don't seem that large either. 

 

I should note that the current MM concentrates opponent tiers seen at same tier much more so than pre 3/5/7 MM, with mostly fewer +2 and -2 opponents seen.  It also somewhat increased average tier of opponent, as the decrease in +2 wasn't as large as the decrease in -2, and any changes in +-1 opponent numbers either supported this increase or weren't enough to outweigh the +-2 effects..  The exception to this is of course T8, where the fewer +2 didn't happen to the same degree, and probably T5, where the fewer -2 is actually no -2.



Trauglodyte #34 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 21:13

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 16092 battles
  • 2,561
  • [GSH] GSH
  • Member since:
    06-04-2016

The problem isn't the template.  The problem has always been and will always be the powercreep of stats combined with the difference in the damage to health ratio.  If I'm in a tier 10 tank and I deal 500 damage per shot while I have 3000 health and I shoot a tier 8 tank that deals 350 damage per shot but only has 1600 health, even a DPM disparity in favor the of the -2 tank isn't going to stem the tide of death.  The -2 tier tank has to worry about lower pen against heavier armor while the +2 tank doesn't have to worry about anything because the +2 tier stats just overpower the -2 tier tank.

 

If health and DPM were equalized and the only difference was the inherent soft stats, pen, alpha, etc., you'd have a healthier game.  Putting in an 8 year old as an Offensive Lineman in an NFL game isn't balance.  Yet, that's what we have now.

 

View PostiAmEbola, on Nov 08 2018 - 19:32, said:

 

4400 years.

 

Got anything new besides that same stupid line?

 

No?  Didn't think so.  

 

Heck, I still don't like it when they changed the Scout MM.  I absolutely loved taking my AMX 12 t in against Tier IX tanks.  BRING THAT BACK!

 

Bring back the tier 7 (not the tier 8 that probably won't be released because they're testing out the Mexican RU at tier 8) "awful" Panther and you've got a deal!


Edited by Trauglodyte, Nov 08 2018 - 21:15.


diego999 #35 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 22:18

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 32406 battles
  • 4,945
  • Member since:
    11-22-2010

View PostiAmEbola, on Nov 08 2018 - 16:49, said:

 

And nobody but me sees this as a bad thing?  

 

Let's go to the extreme and say we get a +0MM.

 

Now imagine T67 padders. Or E-25s. Or Defenders.

 

+2 is fine. Just fix that stupid 3-5-7 crap.



Niteroi #36 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 22:39

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 19451 battles
  • 60
  • Member since:
    01-16-2014
They seemed to signal that they might be willing to go +/- 1 but it would require rebalancing every tank, which in my mind defeats the purpose of doing it. If you make a 1 tier spread as painful as the 2 tier spread that most people experience over 90% of the time, what have you accomplished?  It sounds like they insist on doing everything in their power to encourage cash shop purchases no matter what. That’s where the game is at this late stage of life.

__Worm__ #37 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 22:47

    Major

  • Players
  • 32304 battles
  • 4,241
  • [PYRMD] PYRMD
  • Member since:
    04-29-2011
someone needs to drop the dead horse meme, I am unable...

DrWho_ #38 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 22:59

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 14854 battles
  • 1,096
  • Member since:
    07-29-2017

As has been suggested before by numerous people numerous times, just swap the 3/5/7 template with the 5/10 template as far as preference goes and see what happens.

 

If it works then we get fewer -2 games but they will still happen so that you get more variety within the game, if it doesn't no real harm done and easily reversible



Copacetic #39 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 23:01

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 39186 battles
  • 33
  • [ZEUS] ZEUS
  • Member since:
    02-04-2014
I think wg  likes 3 5 7 and +- 2 because it causes more bottom tier players to consider firing prem ammo more.

SnakePliskan #40 Posted Nov 08 2018 - 23:03

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 21 battles
  • 73
  • Member since:
    07-09-2016

View PostSparkster23, on Nov 08 2018 - 15:59, said:

the wait time is a bs excuse, they want you to shoot premium ammo

 

same reason they dont bring back frontline, there is no money in it for them

 

There is a ton of money in FL for them. Its the ONLY reason to buy a Tier VIII Prem tank. What they need to do is bring it back for tiers V-VIII. Pimp every Prem tank for those single tier matches and cut the credits earned. Add in some Prem reward tank for achieving a certain level of success over the duration of the event.





Also tagged with match making

5 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 5 guests, 0 anonymous users