Jump to content


Can we do match making based on players skill?


  • Please log in to reply
115 replies to this topic

dunniteowl #101 Posted Nov 12 2018 - 08:03

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 22618 battles
  • 4,932
  • Member since:
    09-01-2014

Yeah, Pipinghot, I was going to mention that Camo can be purchased with credits.  FYI to Boghie, it's 75,000 credits for 100 battles.  that's 750 credits per battle and with the slight addition of concealment, I feel certain that it 'pays for itself' over those 100 battles.

 

I have NOT spent one real bit of Money on this game.  I am doing well for my potato laptop and wireless connection.  I can ASSURE you that this game is NOT pay to win.  I am that proof.

 

 

GL, HF & HSYBF!

 

OvO



OLDIRTYBOMBER #102 Posted Nov 12 2018 - 16:44

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 9794 battles
  • 1,361
  • [DONKY] DONKY
  • Member since:
    09-05-2016

View PostPipinghot, on Nov 12 2018 - 06:29, said:

That's true, which is exactly why I explained why WoT is not P2W. I didn't simply say "there are worse games", I gave an actual explanation.

Limiting crew skill it based on how much time they spend playing is not P2W. Every game has an "upgrade path" or "progression path", whether that path is gaining levels and better equipment in an RPG or earning credits and XP to upgrade tanks in WoT. You have to spend time playing if you want to progress through the game. You also have to spend time if you want to be skilled and win more battles, no amount of money will change that. You cannot buy a good WR in WoT, you have to have learned the player skills in order to achieve a better win rate and a higher ranking.

 

* The amount of time you spend getting to Tier X is affected by whether or not you are willing to spend money, that is trading money for time and is not P2W.

* The amount of time you spend to gain skill and to become capable of winning more battles is not affected by spending money, you cannot get a better win rate by buying "magic tank tracks" or the "turret of enhanced RNG", that is the kind of garbage that P2W games do.

 

I've played games in which the top 1,000 players had to spend $50-$100 per month just to stay at the top of the rankings. It didn't matter how good someone was, it didn't matter how much time someone spent playing per day, it simply was not possible be ranked in the top 1,000 without constantly spending money, month after month after month, that is what a P2W game looks like. I never spend a penny on those games, and grew tired of them specifically because it was not possible to earn a top ranking with skill, you had to pay for rankings with money. In WoT you can be ranked in the Top 100 without ever spending a penny, and that is the difference.

 

Spending money in WoT does not improve your win rate, it only improves how much time you have to spend working up the tech tree and improving your crews, that is not P2W.

 

View PostOLDIRTYBOMBER, on Nov 11 2018 - 22:42, said:

Maybe argue that spotting, knowing your spotted and dealing damage have nothing to do with winning? :great:

 

You quoted this, but seemed to completely ignore this fact. 

 

Where in a non p2w game like cs:go is your vision or shooting limited based on how many games you play or money you spent to skip things?

 

P2W AKA  'Pay to progress to the the game allowing you to see and shoot enemies easier for a better chance to win'



NeatoMan #103 Posted Nov 12 2018 - 17:17

    Major

  • Players
  • 26202 battles
  • 17,985
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostOLDIRTYBOMBER, on Nov 12 2018 - 10:44, said:

You quoted this, but seemed to completely ignore this fact. 

 

Where in a non p2w game like cs:go is your vision or shooting limited based on how many games you play or money you spent to skip things?

 

P2W AKA  'Pay to progress to the the game allowing you to see and shoot enemies easier for a better chance to win'

Taking advantage of vision mechanics has more to do with knowing and using the terrain, than it does with crew skills, etc.  Most of the benefits from crews amount to a difference of tens of meters when using the same tank.  Most of the time that's not what's getting you killed.



GeorgePreddy #104 Posted Nov 12 2018 - 17:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 14345 battles
  • 10,003
  • [L_LEG] L_LEG
  • Member since:
    04-11-2013

View Postspud_tuber, on Nov 10 2018 - 22:25, said:

Sounds like you might really enjoy T6 fast run strongholds.  It is all about playing aggressive.   If you've not tried it, you might want to look into a clan that runs them that would let you try them out as a legionnaire. 

 

Strongholds, in my opinion, is a really good mode for players who are not enjoying pubs very much. It's very different, teamwork is used by the better teams and it's easy to make bank.

 

 

 

 

 

 



GeorgePreddy #105 Posted Nov 12 2018 - 17:35

    Major

  • Players
  • 14345 battles
  • 10,003
  • [L_LEG] L_LEG
  • Member since:
    04-11-2013

View PostRonCopeland, on Nov 11 2018 - 10:01, said:

I'll consider you a disingenuous shill. MM is rigged and the game is pay-2-win by definition. Those are game design facts that are not subject to debate.

 

Guy with a 5 battles alt account, obviously because his "real" account is either bad and/or banned is calling someone a "disingenuous shill" and at the same time trying to confuse the issue by calling his opinions "facts".

 

 

 

 

 

 



OLDIRTYBOMBER #106 Posted Nov 12 2018 - 21:23

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 9794 battles
  • 1,361
  • [DONKY] DONKY
  • Member since:
    09-05-2016

View PostNeatoMan, on Nov 12 2018 - 17:17, said:

Taking advantage of vision mechanics has more to do with knowing and using the terrain, than it does with crew skills, etc.  Most of the benefits from crews amount to a difference of tens of meters when using the same tank.  Most of the time that's not what's getting you killed.

 

Yep your right, Heres a quick example...only a difference of tens of meters.....  22 x 10's of meters other wise known as 220 meters between the bottom and top end sliding scale of P2W mechanics. 

No need to see or shoot enemies to win but that's more about the awesome MM :trollface:

 

Posted Image


Edited by OLDIRTYBOMBER, Nov 12 2018 - 21:23.


OLDIRTYBOMBER #107 Posted Nov 12 2018 - 21:31

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 9794 battles
  • 1,361
  • [DONKY] DONKY
  • Member since:
    09-05-2016

Take the 'WOT isn't P2W' Challenge.  Play the tank without ANY of the 'non p2w stuff that doesn't help you win' vs someone with ALL the 'non p2w stuff that doesn't help you win'

It can be a tournament :great:

 



Nunya_000 #108 Posted Nov 12 2018 - 22:06

    Major

  • Players
  • 21063 battles
  • 13,040
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostOLDIRTYBOMBER, on Nov 12 2018 - 12:31, said:

Take the 'WOT isn't P2W' Challenge.  Play the tank without ANY of the 'non p2w stuff that doesn't help you win' vs someone with ALL the 'non p2w stuff that doesn't help you win'

It can be a tournament :great:

 

 

It seems like different people have different definitions of P2W.  Some people seem to think that using items that are easier obtained by spending real money makes it P2W, while other see P2W as "I will win much more often if I spend money".  Most gamers see the later as truly P2W.  In fact, there would be very few internet games of this type that would not be P2W when using the first example as the definition.

 

There is a few fallacy's with your "testing" method.  In random battles, we are rarely in a 1 vs 1 situation, except near the end of the battle.  Any advantage gain in this game by spending real money can be overcome quite easily.  If you take a very good player without what you call the P2W stuff and pit them against a poor player with the P2W stuff, the good player would still likely prevail.

 

There is NOTHING in this game that can be obtained to help players fight battles that is only purchased by spending real money.  Everything can be had by spending credits and a little management of those credits.  The crys of "but....but...but....it's pay to win" is nothing more than a poor excuse.



TheManFromKekistan #109 Posted Nov 12 2018 - 22:10

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 9 battles
  • 744
  • Member since:
    02-03-2017

View PostNunya_000, on Nov 12 2018 - 16:06, said:

There is NOTHING in this game that can be obtained to help players fight battles that is only purchased by spending real money.  Everything can be had by spending credits and a little management of those credits.  The crys of "but....but...but....it's pay to win" is nothing more than a poor excuse.

 

Defender. :trollface:



Nunya_000 #110 Posted Nov 12 2018 - 23:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 21063 battles
  • 13,040
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View PostTheManFromKekistan, on Nov 12 2018 - 13:10, said:

 

Defender. :trollface:

 

I did not get the memo.  :confused:  :arta:

VooDooKobra #111 Posted Yesterday, 12:42 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 8373 battles
  • 4,048
  • [MOVE] MOVE
  • Member since:
    04-23-2011

View PostOLDIRTYBOMBER, on Nov 12 2018 - 13:23, said:

 

Yep your right, Heres a quick example...only a difference of tens of meters.....  22 x 10's of meters other wise known as 220 meters between the bottom and top end sliding scale of P2W mechanics. 

No need to see or shoot enemies to win but that's more about the awesome MM :trollface:

 

Posted Image

 

question though how much money did it cost you to get your crew skills up to that point?  or was it just time played?

NeatoMan #112 Posted Yesterday, 12:44 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 26202 battles
  • 17,985
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostOLDIRTYBOMBER, on Nov 12 2018 - 15:23, said:

Yep your right, Heres a quick example...only a difference of tens of meters.....  22 x 10's of meters other wise known as 220 meters between the bottom and top end sliding scale of P2W mechanics. 

No need to see or shoot enemies to win but that's more about the awesome MM :trollface:

 

LOLOLOL .  You compared a 50% crew on a stripped down T29 to one loaded out with binocs.  Who the hell puts vision equipment on a heavy tank?  Yeah right, that's pay 2 win right there.  :sceptic:.

 

This is what you need to look at.

 

Recon and situational awareness are the main things there that could be gained much faster through premium status.  That's a whopping 17.7m.  You could include chocolate for another 37m.   Vents perhaps, but only the class 3 ones are priced very high.  That's another 17.7m.    So a total of 74m in a tank that doesn't even play the vision game. 

 

Out of all those, chocolate is probably the biggest p2w feature.  The rest just require you to spend more time playing your lower tier tank to earn credits before moving up to the next tier.   Only an idiot puts 50% crews on anything higher than tier 5.  Poor credit management, and impatience when moving up the tiers will put someone in a bad a situation like that, but those are the hallmark of a bad player, not a feature of p2w.

 

Before moving up to my next tier, I always made sure to play my newly elited tank long enough to earn the credits for crew transfer, upgrades and equipment.  So rather than accumulate games in non-elited tanks that were short on equipment and crew skills, I played fully elited ones with decent crews and equipment.

 

It also helped to stay in the lower tier tank longer, because it usually meant I accumulated credits for the inevitable equipment/consumable sale.   It may have set my new tank purchases back a number of games, but it also meant that I was never subject to the same stock tank, bad crew, no equipment syndrome that bad/impatient players suffer from.   Part of being a good player is good resource management.  Bad players usually also have bad xp/credit management skills.

 

Think about it, ...once you've elited a tank, why would you stop playing it, only to exchange it for a newer, unequipped, non-upgraded tank that sits at the bottom of the barrel all over again?  Why not stick with the elited one for a while longer?  No stock tank, no bad crew, etc.   It's impatience, not p2w that makes you continuously suffer from stock tank syndrome with bad crews, no equipment and no consumables.


Edited by NeatoMan, Yesterday, 02:20 AM.


Hurk #113 Posted Yesterday, 12:53 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 52075 battles
  • 17,325
  • [KGR] KGR
  • Member since:
    09-30-2012

View PostOLDIRTYBOMBER, on Nov 12 2018 - 13:23, said:

 

Yep your right, Heres a quick example...only a difference of tens of meters.....  22 x 10's of meters other wise known as 220 meters between the bottom and top end sliding scale of P2W mechanics. 

No need to see or shoot enemies to win but that's more about the awesome MM :trollface:

 

Spoiler

 

thats not pay to win. thats stupid play. if you research the T29 via the M6, you already have the 90mm and dont have to pay at all. 


Edited by Hurk, Yesterday, 12:54 AM.


Pipinghot #114 Posted Yesterday, 07:36 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 25960 battles
  • 8,845
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    11-20-2011

View PostOLDIRTYBOMBER, on Nov 12 2018 - 10:44, said:

View PostPipinghot, on Nov 12 2018 - 06:29, said:

That's true, which is exactly why I explained why WoT is not P2W. I didn't simply say "there are worse games", I gave an actual explanation.

Limiting crew skill it based on how much time they spend playing is not P2W. Every game has an "upgrade path" or "progression path", whether that path is gaining levels and better equipment in an RPG or earning credits and XP to upgrade tanks in WoT. You have to spend time playing if you want to progress through the game. You also have to spend time if you want to be skilled and win more battles, no amount of money will change that. You cannot buy a good WR in WoT, you have to have learned the player skills in order to achieve a better win rate and a higher ranking.

 

* The amount of time you spend getting to Tier X is affected by whether or not you are willing to spend money, that is trading money for time and is not P2W.

* The amount of time you spend to gain skill and to become capable of winning more battles is not affected by spending money, you cannot get a better win rate by buying "magic tank tracks" or the "turret of enhanced RNG", that is the kind of garbage that P2W games do.

 

I've played games in which the top 1,000 players had to spend $50-$100 per month just to stay at the top of the rankings. It didn't matter how good someone was, it didn't matter how much time someone spent playing per day, it simply was not possible be ranked in the top 1,000 without constantly spending money, month after month after month, that is what a P2W game looks like. I never spend a penny on those games, and grew tired of them specifically because it was not possible to earn a top ranking with skill, you had to pay for rankings with money. In WoT you can be ranked in the Top 100 without ever spending a penny, and that is the difference.

 

Spending money in WoT does not improve your win rate, it only improves how much time you have to spend working up the tech tree and improving your crews, that is not P2W.

 

View PostOLDIRTYBOMBER, on Nov 11 2018 - 22:42, said:

Maybe argue that spotting, knowing your spotted and dealing damage have nothing to do with winning? :great:

You quoted this, but seemed to completely ignore this fact.

I ignored it because your "facts" are not accurate.

* You can't pay money to improve the spotting ability of your tank, you can only earn improved spotting abilities by playing the game, therefore it is not P2W.

* You can't pay money to find out that you're spotted, you can only earn that perk by playing the game until your commander has enough XP, therefore it is not P2W.

* You can't pay money to deal more damage, you have to use in-game XP and in-game credits to upgrade your tanks, therefore is it not P2W.

View PostOLDIRTYBOMBER, on Nov 12 2018 - 10:44, said:

 
Where in a non p2w game like cs:go is your vision or shooting limited based on how many games you play or money you spent to skip things?

CS:GO is not free-to-play, you're making an invalid comparison.

View PostOLDIRTYBOMBER, on Nov 12 2018 - 10:44, said:

P2W AKA  'Pay to progress to the the game allowing you to see and shoot enemies easier for a better chance to win'

Again, no. You can progress through every last bit of WoT for free - and just as importantly you can do it in a reasonable amount of time. The rate of progress in WoT for a completely free player is pretty reasonable, especially nowadays when it's easier to get credits than it used to be. You can get to any Tier X tank you want, you can play Skirmishes, you can play CW, you can be a top ranked player based entirely on player skill without spending a penny. That is not P2W.



Pipinghot #115 Posted Yesterday, 07:44 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 25960 battles
  • 8,845
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    11-20-2011

View PostOLDIRTYBOMBER, on Nov 12 2018 - 15:23, said:

View PostNeatoMan, on Nov 12 2018 - 17:17, said:

Taking advantage of vision mechanics has more to do with knowing and using the terrain, than it does with crew skills, etc.  Most of the benefits from crews amount to a difference of tens of meters when using the same tank.  Most of the time that's not what's getting you killed.

Yep your right, Heres a quick example...only a difference of tens of meters.....  22 x 10's of meters other wise known as 220 meters between the bottom and top end sliding scale of P2W mechanics. 

No need to see or shoot enemies to win but that's more about the awesome MM

Everything on the better tank is earned by playing the game. Everything on the better tank can be bought and paid by for a Free player. Every advantage on the better equipped tank cannot be purchased with money. That is not P2W.

 

This is a progression based game, and you have to play if you want to progress. All progression based games make you use some combination of in-game currency XP to purchase upgrades and advance through the game, there is nothing about that system that is P2W.



mattscooby #116 Posted Yesterday, 03:50 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 33495 battles
  • 1,601
  • [KLUB] KLUB
  • Member since:
    12-31-2010

at the moment, the only way i can see them possibly doing anything, at all with skill, is using there own system in a better way.

in the start , it was always based on win loss ratio keeping people, around the 50% mark so even baddies would get put as a good player at some point.

take away company battles, clan wars, for those that would focus on that, and the random player at the top, was about 55% win loss at the most for pure public battles.

time has passed, i spent time away, and income, there own system for a personal rating.

the best thing i can see as been fair is, to use this as both a skill matching system, but also as tier rating system .

500-1500 personal skill level , allows you to play up too tier 3.

1500-2500 unlocks you tiers 4-6.

2500 -5000 unlocks you tiers 7-8.

5000+ unlocks you tiers 8-10.

that is not an accurate set number, but the idea been, your personal wargaming rating, drops, you and just not skilled enough to play at that tier.

a 1000 personal skill rating, is not good enough for a tier 10 battle.

for those that are about too scream, you can still go in company battles, clan wars, with any tank you wish , or have unlocked.

but in pure public battles, you are locked to a tier, regarding your personal skill rating.

learn your tanks, learn to use tds, arty, lights as they are meant to be, rating goes up, and you unlock the next tier selection.

it drops, you are locked from higher tiers in public battles, this way, you have to play better, no tomatoes to tier 10 .

it will not give teams 1 sided battles, as at some point every one will get too a level, based on there on personal rating, there own ability to bounce shots, remain concealed, use a light for its purpose and so on.

you will not be punished for win loss, it is not based like wn8, but purely based on your personal skill rating.

rating goes up, the more tanks available you can play, at your level, not hindering the teams with people, that just should not be passed tier 3, and we have all seen it, many times.

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users