Jump to content


Skill Based Balancing (Not SBMM) Example


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

Ndtm #21 Posted Jul 17 2019 - 15:09

    Major

  • Players
  • 17694 battles
  • 4,624
  • Member since:
    05-01-2012

View PostTrakks, on Jul 17 2019 - 08:15, said:

He is highlighting the poor performance of these players and leaving their names intact. It is name and shame regardless of whether or not he is deliberately trying to be personally insulting to those guys. 

If that's what the mods felt then he would've already been hit by the hammer(a warning) and the post been edited.

There are "better" and "worse" players in all games, it's a bit of a stretch to say that any topic that discusses that is insulting, obviously depends on the context and in this case the thread about something which could benefit all players regardless of skilllevel if you just look at it at face value, but anything skill based can be a bit skewed



Jhuderis #22 Posted Jul 17 2019 - 15:14

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 6052 battles
  • 171
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    05-15-2018

Thanks for continuing the discussion folks. It's been really interesting to see considerations I hadn't thought of. While I don't think "do nothing ever" is the right solution, it certainly highlights how complex all these things are!

 

Some other games have a "ranked solo queue" type system. Maybe a mode for that in WoT? Unranked and ranked pubs? Dunno if that would make any sense.  


Edited by Jhuderis, Jul 17 2019 - 15:20.


Roggg2 #23 Posted Jul 17 2019 - 18:01

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 22172 battles
  • 2,192
  • [D-DAY] D-DAY
  • Member since:
    05-27-2015

View PostJhuderis, on Jul 16 2019 - 13:58, said:

 

Curious why you feel you'd influence the game less if the teams were better balanced. Wouldn't your input to the situation be the same regardless? Honest question. 

Let me present you with an analogy.  Let' say you and I are going to play some doubles tennis.  I am very very bad, and for the sake of argument, let's say you are too.  Also playing will be Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal.

 

Scenario 1:  Random MM.

About half the time, the two best players will play together and win every single game

About half the time, they will be split up, and will each win about half the time

You and I should expect to win about 25% of our games.  Federer and Nadal will win more like 75%.

 

Scenario 2:  Skill balancing matchmaking

100% of the time, Federer and Nadal will be split up onto opposite teams to make a balanced match, and each will win about half the time

We will never have each other as partners, and will win about half our matches.

 

In Random MM, the best players in the world have win rates that reflect their skills in the game.  In SBMM, they have the same win rate as you and I, and their skills cancel each other out.  It's not that their contributions dont matter, it's that the system is setup to negate their contributions, and give them a coin-flip chance in every battle, suppressing the win rates of the best players, and inflating the win rates of scrubs like me and you.



Jhuderis #24 Posted Jul 17 2019 - 22:17

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 6052 battles
  • 171
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    05-15-2018

@Roggg2 Totally makes sense. Without Federer and Nadal being placed in a limited group where they play people "slightly better or slightly worse" than themselves, then it's artificially pushing people up/down too far towards 50% W/R. Whereas in a ranked system your goal is to have players near a 50% because they are largely surrounded by similar skilled peers and have to attain more skill to rise into a new group of more skilled peers.

 

Cheers!






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users