Jump to content


Match Maker

MM Match maker game play

  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

Heat_Stroke #1 Posted Dec 31 2018 - 15:57

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 30677 battles
  • 272
  • Member since:
    02-16-2014

I know the programmers keep trying to figure out the dilemma of match-ups, and I'm not sure there is ever going to be a perfect version without having to wait forever to get in a battle. Too many parameters to consider and no where near enough players to offset it. Honestly, and objectively, I'm not sure I want the "perfect world. It would probably be boring as hell if everyone was equally good, or bad, in every battle. You would then rarely have the opportunity to shine, like killing 8 or so other tanks. That would be a lot less probable in the "Perfect" match-up. 

 

That said, I'm not a fan of losing, probably any more than most of you, he said losing his forth or fifth straight match. Taking that shine into consideration, there is satisfaction from being at top of the (Self Censored) heap. That is to say, until you see the experience points you "don't" earn. I'm looking at the after battle stats for my last match, and even though we lost some of the guys at the top did pretty dang good... but they all got less experience points than the lowest person on the winning team, who did no damage, and apparently died within a minute after the start of the battle, by pouring gas over his tank and lighting it on fire.

 

Case point: I scored highest in damage and experience on the losing side, 3248 dam/ 449 exp. Their worst player scored lowest in both, 0 / 521. A pretty serious disparity in both points and experience. Then they got their x2 (1042) points for the day on top of it? The x2 points and some form of compensation for  wining should absolutely be awarded, but how the exp is divvied up doesn't seem quite right to me.

 

If you started rewarded individuals based on their scores with a slight incentive for win/lose, and not just the win/lose, some of the anger over the matches might subside. It would also stop the bot-ers from loading in a game just to get points, or at least make is a lot less attractive to do so. Like I said it sucks to be on "perpetually" losing teams, but it's like some players get rewarded for doing nothing. Lord knows I have a few of those days too.

 

I don't know guys, what do you think? Would you consider MM less jacked if you at least got rewarded for doing a good job?

 



24_inch_pythons #2 Posted Dec 31 2018 - 16:23

    Major

  • Players
  • 29987 battles
  • 5,701
  • [HSOLO] HSOLO
  • Member since:
    03-28-2012
Almost everybody has recommended / suggested this, I believe. Good luck with your suggestion, though.

RHeadshot #3 Posted Dec 31 2018 - 16:29

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 5722 battles
  • 1,190
  • Member since:
    10-12-2018
The point of the game is to win.  It's not supposed to be to build stats, it's supposed to be to win the battle.  Sometimes that means covering the flank because most teams aren't going to be complete idiots and push one choke point in a lemming rush.  Should the player who guarded an area to help his team, or a player who covered an area because the rest of his team are doing some foolish lemming rush, be punished for being conscientious and actually trying to help the team win rather than to pad his stats that game?

Zugh #4 Posted Dec 31 2018 - 16:31

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 14072 battles
  • 30
  • [FKXX] FKXX
  • Member since:
    08-14-2016
If you earn one of the big medals like Top Gun or High Caliber and you are on the losing team, you also earn something called Courageous Resistance which calculates your xp and credits as though you won.  I haven't won it many times but it was nice to get the appreciation for the near-carry.

Myrenous #5 Posted Dec 31 2018 - 17:04

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 29232 battles
  • 302
  • [KCHUP] KCHUP
  • Member since:
    07-07-2011

this would be a great addition to the game honestly im tired of getting nothing when Ilose even if I do amazing .. I lost a 6200 damage 4 kill game the other day and the only reason I got a decent score was because high caliber, but those awards are rare the winning team usually gets them. I don't think you should get so much less because your team lost... its not your fault you get the team of tomatoes … another thing they should fix is the superheavy armor seeming to always get stacked on 1 team and the other team just gets absolutely rolled because the super heavy side has a huge HP advantage  that no amount of gold can over come. just played a game didn't even get any damage because the other team was so heavy compared to mine they just rolled right over us.. literally hit w and just wrecked my entire team because we had no armor compared to theres and it wasn't an open map couldn't do anything except bounce and die.

 

would be nice if the armor was more even when possible 



Heat_Stroke #6 Posted Dec 31 2018 - 17:43

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 30677 battles
  • 272
  • Member since:
    02-16-2014
I hear you RHeadshot. I usually know I'm doing the right thing when I'm all alone doing it. Sometimes you get to stack some serious points, other times you're just a speed bump.

tod914 #7 Posted Dec 31 2018 - 17:51

    Major

  • Players
  • 64679 battles
  • 6,708
  • Member since:
    12-23-2013
Wot's solution is purchase insurance.  Pay to lose.

Hellsfog #8 Posted Dec 31 2018 - 17:53

    Major

  • Players
  • 38278 battles
  • 6,822
  • Member since:
    06-22-2011

Didn't WG sell 'insurance' for just this sort of thing?

 

View PostRHeadshot, on Dec 31 2018 - 10:29, said:

The point of the game is to win.  It's not supposed to be to build stats, it's supposed to be to win the battle.  Sometimes that means covering the flank because most teams aren't going to be complete idiots and push one choke point in a lemming rush.  Should the player who guarded an area to help his team, or a player who covered an area because the rest of his team are doing some foolish lemming rush, be punished for being conscientious and actually trying to help the team win rather than to pad his stats that game?

You play more arty than anything else so the whole "I defend a flank alone" thing is pretty hollow. 

View PostHeat_Stroke, on Dec 31 2018 - 11:43, said:

I hear you RHeadshot. I usually know I'm doing the right thing when I'm all alone doing it. Sometimes you get to stack some serious points, other times you're just a speed bump.

 

At least you understand that going alone on a flank is a high risk, high reward sort of thing and aren't crying about how ehonoureable it is. 

 

 

 



The_Creeper_Hunter #9 Posted Dec 31 2018 - 17:57

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 28515 battles
  • 78
  • Member since:
    07-07-2013
Greta idea... oop's, just heard paper hit bottom of trash can comrade.

GeorgePreddy #10 Posted Dec 31 2018 - 18:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 14680 battles
  • 13,547
  • Member since:
    04-11-2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



RHeadshot #11 Posted Dec 31 2018 - 19:44

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 5722 battles
  • 1,190
  • Member since:
    10-12-2018

View PostHellsfog, on Dec 31 2018 - 17:53, said:

Didn't WG sell 'insurance' for just this sort of thing?

 

You play more arty than anything else so the whole "I defend a flank alone" thing is pretty hollow.

 

At least you understand that going alone on a flank is a high risk, high reward sort of thing and aren't crying about how ehonoureable it is.

 

 

 

 

You need comprehension lessons, because I never claimed that's what I do.

Hellsfog #12 Posted Dec 31 2018 - 22:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 38278 battles
  • 6,822
  • Member since:
    06-22-2011

View PostRHeadshot, on Dec 31 2018 - 10:29, said:

The point of the game is to win.  It's not supposed to be to build stats, it's supposed to be to win the battle.  Sometimes that means covering the flank because most teams aren't going to be complete idiots and push one choke point in a lemming rush.  Should the player who guarded an area to help his team, or a player who covered an area because the rest of his team are doing some foolish lemming rush, be punished for being conscientious and actually trying to help the team win rather than to pad his stats that game?

 

View PostRHeadshot, on Dec 31 2018 - 13:44, said:

 

You need comprehension lessons, because I never claimed that's what I do.

 

Really? Who is this fictional person then? 



RHeadshot #13 Posted Jan 01 2019 - 03:40

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 5722 battles
  • 1,190
  • Member since:
    10-12-2018

View PostHellsfog, on Dec 31 2018 - 22:52, said:

 

 

Really? Who is this fictional person then?

 

there are a lot of players it applies to.  again, learn how to read.

Hellsfog #14 Posted Jan 01 2019 - 17:49

    Major

  • Players
  • 38278 battles
  • 6,822
  • Member since:
    06-22-2011

View PostRHeadshot, on Dec 31 2018 - 21:40, said:

 

there are a lot of players it applies to.  again, learn how to read.

 

One of them is you or are we discussing these fictional players again.  So let me understand this more fully. You are talking about players, who aren't you and you don't know, that you think should get a reward for doing something dumb.

RHeadshot #15 Posted Jan 01 2019 - 19:16

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 5722 battles
  • 1,190
  • Member since:
    10-12-2018

View PostHellsfog, on Jan 01 2019 - 17:49, said:

 

One of them is you or are we discussing these fictional players again.  So let me understand this more fully. You are talking about players, who aren't you and you don't know, that you think should get a reward for doing something dumb.

 

thanks.  now I know you're just a troll to ignore

 



scHnuuudle_bop #16 Posted Jan 01 2019 - 20:54

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 21245 battles
  • 3,720
  • Member since:
    05-03-2016

View PostRHeadshot, on Jan 01 2019 - 19:16, said:

 

thanks.  now I know you're just a troll to ignore

 

 

Oh, yes, ignore this girl.

 

I think her Dad does not know she uses his account and gets into the forum to spout nonsense.

You can even agree with her and she gets cranky. 

 

 

We need a match maker just like Warships.

 

Equal and identical vehicles each team. For each T67, there has to be a T67 on the other team, etc. Match them exactly, disable all stat programs. 

 

 


Edited by scHnuuudle_bop, Jan 01 2019 - 20:55.


Heat_Stroke #17 Posted Jan 04 2019 - 19:01

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 30677 battles
  • 272
  • Member since:
    02-16-2014

View PostscHnuuudle_bop, on Jan 01 2019 - 20:54, said:

 

Oh, yes, ignore this girl.

 

I think her Dad does not know she uses his account and gets into the forum to spout nonsense.

You can even agree with her and she gets cranky. 

 

 

We need a match maker just like Warships.

 

Equal and identical vehicles each team. For each T67, there has to be a T67 on the other team, etc. Match them exactly, disable all stat programs. 

 

 

 

Haven't played much on Warships, but I'd guess the large variety of tank selections makes that impossible. Driving something you don't see much could take an hour to get in a game while you wait for someone else to play it. Last I read in the whitepaper for WOT 's MM, was they used tank weight as the basis for match ups. Although that could have changed over the last several years.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users