Jump to content


Fix your matchmaker

matchmaker easy wins losses teams mm bad mm

  • Please log in to reply
53 replies to this topic

TankFullOfBourbon #21 Posted Jul 02 2019 - 16:53

    Major

  • Players
  • 30270 battles
  • 6,792
  • [DHO6] DHO6
  • Member since:
    08-10-2013

View PostCygnus610, on Jul 02 2019 - 15:55, said:

 

I don't think MM balances teams based on skill, although sometimes I feel it UNBALANCES them based on skill......:trollface:

I understand you are making a joke, but it is the playerbase that is unbalanced. MM deals with what its' got.


Edited by TankFullOfBourbon, Jul 02 2019 - 16:53.


TankFullOfBourbon #22 Posted Jul 02 2019 - 16:57

    Major

  • Players
  • 30270 battles
  • 6,792
  • [DHO6] DHO6
  • Member since:
    08-10-2013

View PostSayjj, on Jul 02 2019 - 15:08, said:

Match maker does not. Repeat NOT balance skill at this time and place in space. If you are expecting Matchmaker to balance your teams based on skill, you are waiting for a train that will not come.

Lets say it together now :  MM does NOT balance teams based on skill.

Does NOT!

I dont think i am a fan of Skill-based MM, and WG has made huge improvements on the MM. People playing now and complaining either never experienced or forgot what it was like to be the only tier VIII as a scout in an all X game.....

Well said.

 

MM is the crutch that people blame their handicap on. I am curious why they don't expect MM to fix the unbalanced teams but randomly pick better or worse tanks to the players instead? A 45% w/r potato gets a Maus and a 62% unicum gets a Pz.Ic. Wouldn't that "balance" things?

 

Edit: oups, I just realized I may have given the whiners a new idea. TBMM (Tank Based MM or Tier Based MM). Damn, me and my fast fingers.


Edited by TankFullOfBourbon, Jul 02 2019 - 16:58.


Mfezi #23 Posted Jul 02 2019 - 17:29

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 28264 battles
  • 1,697
  • [SADD] SADD
  • Member since:
    04-05-2016

View Post_Tsavo_, on Jul 02 2019 - 14:28, said:

So, what's your fix?   What problems are identified and how would they be rectified?  What benefits would we see and why should we support it? 

 

How about fixing MM so that the outcome of a battle is not predictable?.... :)

 



enjineer #24 Posted Jul 02 2019 - 17:32

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 46186 battles
  • 2,830
  • [-CMF-] -CMF-
  • Member since:
    12-07-2010

View PostMfezi, on Jul 02 2019 - 11:29, said:

 

How about fixing MM so that the outcome of a battle is not predictable?.... :)

 

How about after 27,000 battles you learn to play better?



Mfezi #25 Posted Jul 02 2019 - 17:36

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 28264 battles
  • 1,697
  • [SADD] SADD
  • Member since:
    04-05-2016

View PostTankFullOfBourbon, on Jul 02 2019 - 16:05, said:

What needs to be fixed are players. Fix yourself to start with.

 

Why is it that you think that everything you don't like is something that must be fixed. MM stacks the teams randomly. With a playerbase the way it is, all it takes are 5-6 good players in one team and you have a landslide victory, because the other players are so gruesomely bad.

 

A true pearl of wisdom - I wonder how we could fix this....

i) train all players up to the same level? or

ii) simply balance the teams?....

 

Hmmmm - which would be easier?.... :)

 



ethics_gradient #26 Posted Jul 02 2019 - 17:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 41151 battles
  • 2,350
  • [DHO-X] DHO-X
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

Am I the only one who likes MM in its current iteration?  Prior to the latest changes, I could only play Tiers 7, 9, and 10.  Now I find that I can play the other tiers and not find myself in completely hopeless situations.

 

That is not to say that there are no problems, but that has more to do with the players who do incredibly stupid things.  Last night for example, we had a skorp that hid in a corner for the first 12 minutes of battle, TK'd our only arty, and then finally started playing. The rest of the team played well enough that we almost won, but we could not find the last tank to kill before time ran out.



Mfezi #27 Posted Jul 02 2019 - 17:42

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 28264 battles
  • 1,697
  • [SADD] SADD
  • Member since:
    04-05-2016

View Postenjineer, on Jul 02 2019 - 18:32, said:

How about after 27,000 battles you learn to play better?

 

Telling a green player that he should get better - do you not realize that op is more than likely in the top 15% of players based on skill?

 

Seems that you just trot out the normal forum mantra without any thought process involved!..... :)

 



enjineer #28 Posted Jul 02 2019 - 18:42

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 46186 battles
  • 2,830
  • [-CMF-] -CMF-
  • Member since:
    12-07-2010

View PostMfezi, on Jul 02 2019 - 11:42, said:

 

Telling a green player that he should get better - do you not realize that op is more than likely in the top 15% of players based on skill?

 

Seems that you just trot out the normal forum mantra without any thought process involved!..... :)

 

I wasn't referring to the OP.



Smockj #29 Posted Jul 02 2019 - 18:48

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 14912 battles
  • 15
  • Member since:
    01-20-2012
one option I have not seen voiced is to have a stock class and open class mm. only tech tree vehicles allowed in stock class battles and open class is normal play as it is now with premium tanks and shells.

let the flaming begin...

Kliphie #30 Posted Jul 02 2019 - 18:50

    Major

  • Players
  • 32679 battles
  • 5,055
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    07-20-2012

View PostSmockj, on Jul 02 2019 - 12:48, said:

one option I have not seen voiced is to have a stock class and open class mm. only tech tree vehicles allowed in stock class battles and open class is normal play as it is now with premium tanks and shells.

let the flaming begin...

 

The tried a historical mode several years ago with fixed modules and team compositions.  It did not do well.  



GeoMonster #31 Posted Jul 02 2019 - 19:01

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 35662 battles
  • 1,229
  • [W0LF-] W0LF-
  • Member since:
    06-13-2016

View PostGeorgePreddy, on Jul 02 2019 - 07:57, said:

WG's thoughts on this issue:

 

You have reached Wargaming Customer Support.

 

Thank you for sharing to us your concern. We are always here to aid you.

 

The addition of skill-based conditions to the matchmaking equation would disrupt the very idea behind Random Battles. Although the mode has rules, there is an element of randomness to each battle, and the thrill that comes with it is what we all love about Random Battles. Everyone gets a chance to become a hero, to prove their worth playing against people with different battle histories. It wouldn’t be possible with skill-based matchmaking.

 

If you have any other concerns, please do not hesitate to contact us.

 

For more information please visit our Player Support Page.

 

Have a great day!

 

We are lucky that WG is smart enough to not fall into the SBMM trap when it comes to Random Battles !

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Green Seal Clubber posting inflated stats has spoken!

 

BTW ... WG doesn't always do things correctly.  There are ULTERIOR motives as to why WG will not implement any form of SBMM.  They have been discussed elsewhere.  Anyone who believes that WG knows exactly what they are doing is a fool.

 



ez_money #32 Posted Jul 02 2019 - 19:06

    Captain

  • Players
  • 15818 battles
  • 1,651
  • Member since:
    10-23-2011

View PostDeputy276, on Jul 02 2019 - 08:02, said:

Geez...the guy is complaining about 50% wins yesterday. I had ONE win in 9 games. What server were you using????? :amazed:

That's exactly what my first reaction was. I'd take 50% anytime these days and be glad about it.



Markd73 #33 Posted Jul 02 2019 - 19:07

    Major

  • Players
  • 32795 battles
  • 5,100
  • Member since:
    04-20-2011

View Postbockscar43, on Jul 02 2019 - 15:01, said:

Oh my, how some fear sbmm, and why would that be. Their precious stats may be in jeopardy and their bragging could come to an end. The only thing to fear is fear itself, thanks to FDR. One can dodge folly without backing into fear, just sayn.

 

Alternatively people are just not interested in being punished by be being forced to carry more bads as they improve.



Markd73 #34 Posted Jul 02 2019 - 19:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 32795 battles
  • 5,100
  • Member since:
    04-20-2011

View PostMfezi, on Jul 02 2019 - 16:36, said:

 

A true pearl of wisdom - I wonder how we could fix this....

i) train all players up to the same level? or

ii) simply balance the teams?....

 

Hmmmm - which would be easier?.... :)

 

 

People taking responsibility for their own gameplay would be easier.

 

Take me for example - I am a meh plateaued green. I play "for fun", yet I do not want WG to hand me wins that I do not deserve. I am the only common denominator over my battles and it is up to me to figure out how to improve. If I do not improve then that is on me.



Odo_de_Barri #35 Posted Jul 02 2019 - 19:25

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 41513 battles
  • 50
  • [GKAD] GKAD
  • Member since:
    05-26-2015

View PostSevok, on Jul 02 2019 - 16:40, said:

Matchmaker is fine, the players are broken.

 

 

You are not wrong - the players are broken (i.e. inexperienced and don't know all the angles, tricks, map personalities, game mechanical glitches, and/or software assistance elements). 

 

The real problem comes when the unbroken MM "randomly" stacks the unbroken players on one team against a team of broken ones and then rolls it.  Happens often - randomly.

 

 



Mfezi #36 Posted Jul 02 2019 - 20:13

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 28264 battles
  • 1,697
  • [SADD] SADD
  • Member since:
    04-05-2016

View PostMarkd73, on Jul 02 2019 - 20:10, said:

 

People taking responsibility for their own gameplay would be easier.

 

Take me for example - I am a meh plateaued green. I play "for fun", yet I do not want WG to hand me wins that I do not deserve. I am the only common denominator over my battles and it is up to me to figure out how to improve. If I do not improve then that is on me.

 

And you think that the current MM is ONLY handing you wins that you DO deserve???....

 

Failed logic I would say!.... :)

 



Wraithed #37 Posted Jul 02 2019 - 20:52

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 27460 battles
  • 80
  • [MRE] MRE
  • Member since:
    07-31-2010

What people are saying in this thread is wrong. 

 

1. WG has intentionally made the matchmaker in such a way that it wants players to be around 50% win rate. The first evidence of this is that the vast majority of players are all in and around 50% Win rate. If you take a look at the stats for a game that doesn't do this... say for example Bad Company 2 you will notice that there are players with win rates all over the spectrum. Also, their MM patent was discovered a long time ago and it specifically stated that this was a capability of their system. A direct quote from the WG patent "As players research and purchase more advanced technologies, those players advance in skill and ability, which also affects how those players should be matched against other players in the game by matchmaking server 106." This flat out says that the MM takes into consideration your player skill level. How do they know your skill level?  WIN8, Win Rate, Damage per game, etc...

https://patents.google.com/patent/US8425330B1/en

 

2. WG claimed that the new matchmaker recently fixed this. Did anyone else notice that for about a month the matches were awesome? They were close games. Right after the recent changes for about a month my Win Rate went up again. However, more recently it seems to have all gone back to garbage. Most games are blow outs. I seem to be on the short end of the stick about 45% of the time. Also I have noticed that the players on my team are absolute trash. My team seems to get a lot of Bots, or people that don't leave the cap area. They sit in one corner of the map ceding 3/4ths of it to the other team. Cannot win this way. If you don't think that MM is taking into consideration your win rate then you are dim witted. 

 

3. WG could fix this. They could ban XVM. They could truly randomize the teams, taking into consideration only tiers and tank class. Or they could give us dedicated servers (pipe dream, too much dev work).

 

4. They won't fix this. They make too much money from people who are unskilled who for some strange reason still have a 47% win rate. It is my belief that the % above or below 50% is the difference you make on the battlefield. The MM tries to make you 50% and for example 5% of the time I beat that. Someone who is 45% is so bad that they make their team lose 5% more often than they should. Less people will play if they "suck" at the game. The MM makes sure that people who do suck get some wins and keep playing. This however alienates the skilled players and they stop playing. Fortunately for WG there are crapton more unskilled players than skilled players. 

 

Summary, MM is broken and it is not in WG interest to fix it. 

 

If you think I am wrong then read the patent. If you don't read the patent and you think I am wrong then you are ignorant. 

 


Edited by Wraithed, Jul 02 2019 - 21:16.


DeviouslyCursed #38 Posted Jul 03 2019 - 03:54

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 4554 battles
  • 600
  • Member since:
    12-13-2018

View PostWraithed, on Jul 02 2019 - 20:52, said:

What people are saying in this thread is wrong. 

 

1. WG has intentionally made the matchmaker in such a way that it wants players to be around 50% win rate. The first evidence of this is that the vast majority of players are all in and around 50% Win rate. If you take a look at the stats for a game that doesn't do this... say for example Bad Company 2 you will notice that there are players with win rates all over the spectrum. Also, their MM patent was discovered a long time ago and it specifically stated that this was a capability of their system. A direct quote from the WG patent "As players research and purchase more advanced technologies, those players advance in skill and ability, which also affects how those players should be matched against other players in the game by matchmaking server 106." This flat out says that the MM takes into consideration your player skill level. How do they know your skill level?  WIN8, Win Rate, Damage per game, etc...

https://patents.google.com/patent/US8425330B1/en

 

2. WG claimed that the new matchmaker recently fixed this. Did anyone else notice that for about a month the matches were awesome? They were close games. Right after the recent changes for about a month my Win Rate went up again. However, more recently it seems to have all gone back to garbage. Most games are blow outs. I seem to be on the short end of the stick about 45% of the time. Also I have noticed that the players on my team are absolute trash. My team seems to get a lot of Bots, or people that don't leave the cap area. They sit in one corner of the map ceding 3/4ths of it to the other team. Cannot win this way. If you don't think that MM is taking into consideration your win rate then you are dim witted. 

 

3. WG could fix this. They could ban XVM. They could truly randomize the teams, taking into consideration only tiers and tank class. Or they could give us dedicated servers (pipe dream, too much dev work).

 

4. They won't fix this. They make too much money from people who are unskilled who for some strange reason still have a 47% win rate. It is my belief that the % above or below 50% is the difference you make on the battlefield. The MM tries to make you 50% and for example 5% of the time I beat that. Someone who is 45% is so bad that they make their team lose 5% more often than they should. Less people will play if they "suck" at the game. The MM makes sure that people who do suck get some wins and keep playing. This however alienates the skilled players and they stop playing. Fortunately for WG there are crapton more unskilled players than skilled players. 

 

Summary, MM is broken and it is not in WG interest to fix it. 

 

If you think I am wrong then read the patent. If you don't read the patent and you think I am wrong then you are ignorant. 

 

 

With 15 players per team, all it takes to bunch people toward 50% is a completely random MM. The more players per team, the closer to 50% you will be.



gamagrass #39 Posted Jul 03 2019 - 04:00

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 10906 battles
  • 373
  • [-STD-] -STD-
  • Member since:
    07-03-2015

View PostUrAnnoying, on Jul 02 2019 - 13:00, said:

played again tonight. 50% wins and losses. 6 really obvious wins nearly 15-0. then 6 horrible stupid matches almost nearly 0-15. just fix it. dont know whos more dumb the playerbase or wargaming.


1)  try 21 matches with a 24% win then cry about it.

2)  Nothing is wrong with the MM, it the clueless morons that still do not have a clue what they are doing. 

 

that is all.



Sevok #40 Posted Jul 03 2019 - 04:01

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 44389 battles
  • 54
  • Member since:
    08-05-2011

View PostOdo_de_Barri, on Jul 02 2019 - 13:25, said:

 

 

You are not wrong - the players are broken (i.e. inexperienced and don't know all the angles, tricks, map personalities, game mechanical glitches, and/or software assistance elements). 

 

The real problem comes when the unbroken MM "randomly" stacks the unbroken players on one team against a team of broken ones and then rolls it.  Happens often - randomly.

 

 

 

MM is the same for everyone.  The players are not the same for MM.

As for the conspiracy that MM is intentionally holding people back, I'm not sure I buy it.  Certain players are still able to excel.  Some players will never, ever succeed.  MM can't fix that.

 

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users