Jump to content


Incoming! Dev Diaries featuring Matchmaker.

KRZY MM MatchMaker Match Maker Damn you WG

  • Please log in to reply
133 replies to this topic

Tao_Te_Tomato #121 Posted Feb 13 2019 - 17:05

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 27439 battles
  • 2,276
  • [TER] TER
  • Member since:
    02-28-2016

In no particular order:

 

1.  I don't want a fair game.  I want a game that's unfair in my favor.  :trollface:

 

2.  I would agree that you don't get better by playing against worse players.  That's called "seal clubbing."  But see Point 1 above.  :trollface:

 

3.  Unless it's some weird acronym I am unaware of and am not going to try and look up, y'all need to check on the definition of "moot."  Moot means "irrelevant due to changed circumstances," or, from a couple decades ago, "OTBE."  Overtaken By Events.  "Here's a fix for 3-5-7 matchmaking.  We don't use 3-5-7 any more.  Oh, then the fix is moot."

 

4.  I would also agree that Tier IX is a "sweet spot."  I have a lot of unlocked Tier X tanks I'll never see because I'm satisfied with the 9s.*  :D

 

5.  I think the one-up/one-down, with PMM tanks getting only equal/one-down treatment would work reasonably well.  Not perfectly, because nothing's going to be perfect.  But reasonably well.  

 

 

 

*OTOH, the IS-7 and Maus are definitely worth it.  :)



BFH7 #122 Posted Feb 13 2019 - 22:01

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 3237 battles
  • 19
  • [BUBL] BUBL
  • Member since:
    03-29-2016

There's a lot going on in there and i'm not sure they are really answering the question or fixing the problem. First of all, they are the developers and "they" can program this anyway they want. How about 37 mm shell from a tier III take out tier 10? They can do it. Anything can be programed. The easiest way from a programing prespective is do the tiers like this

Tier 1 fights tier 1 and 2

Tiers 3 through 7 fight +1 / -1

Tier 8 fights tiers 7, 9, and 10 with a mechanism that keeps the 8 from always being bottom tier. WG created this problem with the premium 8's. Theoretically you should know something before getting a tier 8, I only have 1 and it was a mistake. On the other hand tier 10's probably have no one ( new? ) to fight so WG made premium 8's and the messed up mm to make it at least seem like once you get a 9 or 10 you could go and seal club premium 8 tanks with people who did not know how to even play at all. 



BoHarper #123 Posted Feb 24 2019 - 04:20

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 50607 battles
  • 186
  • [PZB] PZB
  • Member since:
    09-12-2010
2 TIER DIFFERENCE SUCKS! 8's should not have to fight 10's

Boinka #124 Posted Mar 09 2019 - 01:26

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 5217 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    05-30-2012

Pasting my comment from a different thread with some minor adjustments, as it might be more relevent here.

 

Incorporate WN8 into matchmaking. Two teams, A and B, made with the matchmaker as it is now. Let's say it's t10 through t8. So you have 6 t10 tanks, 3 per side. Have the best (according to WN8) be on team A. Second and third best on team B. Fourth and fifth best on team A. Sixth best on team B. Do the same with t9 and t8. TA DA, all better. No more massively lopsided blowouts, still the same players in each match in the same tanks they're playing just as it is now.

 

Wargaming already has access to the WN8 data. It already has the matchmaker as it is now. PUT THE TWO TOGETHER. If it's not the long term fix, fine, not a big deal, but it fixes most of the problems RIGHT NOW and won't take six months. Queue times won't change at all, it's the same tanks into the same matches, no difference. Blowout matches aren't fun for anybody, and this way it would rapidly address the problem and produce more balanced and worthwhile games. Get that on the test server within a week, and you'd see the players rejoice over having matches where the outcome isn't decided before the game even starts. If nothing else, it'll buy time while a more long term solution is developed, and we the players won't be wondering why we're even playing when half the time we could just walk away and go make a sandwich, due to the massive imbalance in skill between the teams.

 

Matchmaking has been broken for a long, long time. Please stop with the excuses and the "working on it" lines, and put a solution on the test server NOW. Six months? Great, it's been a problem for at YEARS, so that six months should have been started years ago. Instead it's always been excuses and delays, or silence. Enough already. Just incorporate WN8 and balance out the skill between the teams while wargaming continues to stall and give excuses about a longer term solution.

 

This is not rocket science. The matchmaker tweaks posted seem like they're trying to overthink it. Just plug in the WN8 to how teams are divided up in each match, and the quality of the matches will go up noticably. Given how fast it would be to program into the game, I just can't wrap my head around why WG hasn't implemented anything like this yet. It's plain to see that the teams are not balanced against each other in any way, and that seems to me to be the biggest problem in matchmaking.



Diacom #125 Posted Mar 12 2019 - 19:42

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 31808 battles
  • 828
  • [MKGGT] MKGGT
  • Member since:
    12-04-2011

One thing everyone that wants to go from a +/- 2 tier spread down to a +/- 1 tier spread is forgetting is it will impact the economy.

 

Let me explain.  You get more XP and credits for damaging higher tier tanks than if you damage same tier or lower tier tanks.  It's a very well known quantity in this game.  Now if you drop to a +/- 1 tier spread, you are taking xp and credits out of your own pocket when you ask for this.

 

Part of this issue is the rebalance of credit earnings WG did a few years back reducing the amount of credits you could earn in a battle while at the same time switching premium rounds from gold to credits.  This had a big impact on most casual and bad players credit earning potential.  Add in arty getting hosed on damge/cost per round when the new stun mechanism came into play and you have more potential loss of income.

 

This doesn't even take into account the rebalancing fiasco they've already done for light tanks to make them fit the current +/- 2 tier spread where they ruined scouts.  They would make it even worse by having to rebalance them down for the asked for +/- 1 spread.  Many scouts faired better before we had tier 10 lights in the game and the rebalance from their addition compared to what we have now.

 

All I'm saying is be careful what you are asking for when you ask for a +/- 1 MM to go into effect.  The impact will take years to straighten out.  I think many who play the game now already know this game may not have "years" left at it's current rate of "improvement."  i.e. the stupid skins for crews that is being introduced.  Just another way to suck credits/RL cash out of players who chose to play with that rather than just use a mod to do it for you.  Not to mention the waste of Development time being put into this atrocity.



Tank_You_All #126 Posted Apr 02 2019 - 17:44

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 43965 battles
  • 166
  • [-23-] -23-
  • Member since:
    01-17-2015
We shall see. The new system of +- 1 starts tomorrow. Time will tell. I do know that I am very tired of being 2 tiers down every match. I fight more that 80% of my battles that way.

Snohoe #127 Posted Apr 02 2019 - 18:19

    Captain

  • Players
  • 18309 battles
  • 1,642
  • [AIMED] AIMED
  • Member since:
    07-05-2011
Apparently they have a single guy working on it all... No wonder everything takes them so long.

Tank_You_All #128 Posted Apr 02 2019 - 19:33

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 43965 battles
  • 166
  • [-23-] -23-
  • Member since:
    01-17-2015
One thing that limiting it to +1 tiers is that my TOG may be fun again. Sitting in that against tier 8s is no fun, they kill me quickly.

Tank_You_All #129 Posted Apr 02 2019 - 19:39

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 43965 battles
  • 166
  • [-23-] -23-
  • Member since:
    01-17-2015

View PostDiacom, on Mar 12 2019 - 12:42, said:

One thing everyone that wants to go from a +/- 2 tier spread down to a +/- 1 tier spread is forgetting is it will impact the economy.

 

Let me explain.  You get more XP and credits for damaging higher tier tanks than if you damage same tier or lower tier tanks.  It's a very well known quantity in this game.  Now if you drop to a +/- 1 tier spread, you are taking xp and credits out of your own pocket when you ask for this.

 

Part of this issue is the rebalance of credit earnings WG did a few years back reducing the amount of credits you could earn in a battle while at the same time switching premium rounds from gold to credits.  This had a big impact on most casual and bad players credit earning potential.  Add in arty getting hosed on damge/cost per round when the new stun mechanism came into play and you have more potential loss of income.

 

This doesn't even take into account the rebalancing fiasco they've already done for light tanks to make them fit the current +/- 2 tier spread where they ruined scouts.  They would make it even worse by having to rebalance them down for the asked for +/- 1 spread.  Many scouts faired better before we had tier 10 lights in the game and the rebalance from their addition compared to what we have now.

 

All I'm saying is be careful what you are asking for when you ask for a +/- 1 MM to go into effect.  The impact will take years to straighten out.  I think many who play the game now already know this game may not have "years" left at it's current rate of "improvement."  i.e. the stupid skins for crews that is being introduced.  Just another way to suck credits/RL cash out of players who chose to play with that rather than just use a mod to do it for you.  Not to mention the waste of Development time being put into this atrocity.

 

Well I do agree with you about the crew skins, that was a waste of time on the part of WOT. As to the rest of it, well there is never a perfect balance. I do agree with some people in that WOT is killing the game by trying to make money off of all the pay to play gold tanks. Yes, they may be getting paid for it but in my opinion they would be better off reducing the price of a premium account and get more people to pay them a small amount every month to play. Set it up such that a full year subscription costs about 5 bucks a month, many more people would pop for that then the current 10 per month. Then we can get back to playing with a more balanced set of tanks.



kriegspiel57 #130 Posted Apr 02 2019 - 20:07

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 34314 battles
  • 274
  • [TAC-D] TAC-D
  • Member since:
    07-08-2011

View PostAtago_C, on Feb 07 2019 - 14:27, said:

A simple question. 

 

There are only 20000 people in NA server and 400000 people in RU server. The test will be running on the RU server and the final result is supposed to fit the RU server. How dose this new match maker work perfectly on NA?

 

And this is the main reason why the new matchmaker will still have people griping about the changes. Very good point made. I never was good in mathematics, but this makes sense to me. And the video shows the devs know this. Listen to them

say it will still happen to players getting in 3/5/7 templates. I for one will play to get better while not investing a lot of money to become dependent on a win when spending real cash. The game can be enjoyable either way.  



kriegspiel57 #131 Posted Apr 02 2019 - 20:27

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 34314 battles
  • 274
  • [TAC-D] TAC-D
  • Member since:
    07-08-2011

View Postdelabuxx2xx, on Feb 08 2019 - 06:00, said:

Wg,

I know people will be bEtching until the end of time but this news gives me a very small but very bright glimmer of hope for the game's future. Thank you so much for putting in effort to remedy the game that has the potential to be awesome :)

 

 

Very good point Dela, I would like to thank WG for listening to our NA group and implementing change to the MM. Keeping  the game fair, while still competitive, will allow WG to remain a successful endeavor.    

Dodforer #132 Posted Apr 02 2019 - 22:44

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 9650 battles
  • 11
  • [_WOLF] _WOLF
  • Member since:
    10-17-2015
You could keep 3 tier matches in place by changing it to 2-4-9.  The problem with 3-5-7 is that the lower tier is always outnumbered by higher tier tanks, regardless of their tier.  In a 2-4-9 matchup, the lower tier would still outnumber the higher tier tanks combined and have a fighting chance.  So use that as your 3 tier MM, keep the 5-10 and on tier matchups.  That's 3 different possible outcomes that don't screw the lower tiers completely.

Trippledot #133 Posted Apr 03 2019 - 13:17

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 20675 battles
  • 31
  • Member since:
    02-21-2014

Greetings, 

There is only 1 indicator, which confirms if the MM work properly, or not = and its the battle duration (which i really hope, you collect it follow it).

to my opinion, above 30% of the battles, ending in less than 4min, and this is a BIG failure to the MM (good battle should reach at least to the 10-12min duration).

 

you most probably got this request several times ... but just to be sure you are considering, in your TOP next fixes.

we all WISH and HOPE, that MM (Matchmaker) will start considering balancing the PR, between the team (we all for a fair game here, right ? ;)

 



Chad_Mowrey #134 Posted Sep 13 2019 - 18:49

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 0 battles
  • 1
  • Member since:
    04-22-2016

How about just have matchmaker match players up with similar win rates? Oh that's right I forgot that Wargaming is an unethical company that doesn't care one bit about a player's experience. They want a matchmaker that focuses on $$$. The funny part is, WG is too stupid to realize that when a player goes into battles time and time again that are so OBVIOUSLY rigged the player is far less likely to spend any money on WG's products. WG should at least make the battle rigging a little less obvious so they don't look like such jokes. Have at least a little bit of dignity WG... I've never seen a video game developer so unanimously disrespected by the community like WG is. 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users