20 replies to this topic

[Marcus_Aurelius66]

Matchmaking is broken, has been for years. Even though we have all told you how to fix it you ignore everyone, and now the game is in decline. The simple fix is for matchmaker when it is drawing up the teams to spread the WN8 statistics even between the two teams. How hard can that be? Now we have team overwhelmed with either a loss or a win. Stupid attempt at coding imo.

[kebab6597]

Now had you said balance teams by WG,s PR you might have had a point to your thread, but WN8 is a 3rd party stat and nothing to do with WG so why on earth would they use it to balance teams, and posting from an alt account is just bad

[jst2gr8]

I am sorry but the MM is not broken. The players are the ones that are broken. They all want the wins but do not want to do anything, like get better, to get them. If this is about the 15-4, 15-8, -15-1 losses then you are looking for a scapegoat instead of taking the blame for not putting in more damage. It is always the MM's fault when you do not have the skills to help a team win, right?

As for MM being broken... I have seen more tier 8 matches while being in a tier 8 than I ever have. Which makes it easier to grind certain lines. 

 

Please stop kicking the dead horse with this subject!!! It doesn't matter if you are wearing new boots, steal toed, rubber or leather. The horse is still going to be dead. All you did is waste energy for nothing. 

[Mojo_Riesing]

Marcus_Aurelius66, on Jul 14 2019 - 02:44, said:

Matchmaking is broken, has been for years. Even though we have all told you how to fix it you ignore everyone, and now the game is in decline. The simple fix is for matchmaker when it is drawing up the teams to spread the WN8 statistics even between the two teams. How hard can that be? Now we have team overwhelmed with either a loss or a win. Stupid attempt at coding imo.

 

kebab6597, on Jul 14 2019 - 03:31, said:

Now had you said balance teams by WG,s PR you might have had a point to your thread, but WN8 is a 3rd party stat and nothing to do with WG so why on earth would they use it to balance teams, and posting from an alt account is just bad

 

I'm not sure WoT is in decline beyond the usual game life cycle but...whatever.  Match-maker is and probably will always be an imperfect concept that changes over time. While i agree some kind of skills element to MM would be good, using WN8 is just a bad idea.  First as noted in kebab's post, it's not part of the WG product, second i don't think WN8 is really all that fair or great of an assessment anyway. "Success" in WN8 has clear bias towards higher tiers and most players don't play there.  I don't know why WG gives away so valuable a "product" as it's raw statistical information. They allow 3rd parties to use and manipulate it without oversight and that just doesn't make business sense.  Wargaming should SELL the information to approved vendors who use it as WG deems correctly...if they release them at all.  If i were in management of WG , i'd bring ALL statistical data evaluation back in-house as part of the WG product.

[Pipinghot]

Marcus_Aurelius66, on Jul 14 2019 - 05:44, said:

Matchmaking is broken, has been for years.

No.

Marcus_Aurelius66, on Jul 14 2019 - 05:44, said:

Even though we have all told you how to fix it you ignore everyone

No, not "all". A vocal minority keeps on trying to push skill based matchmaking which WG has no interest in. If you want a game to hold your hand and hugs you then there are a zillion other games that do this. Wargaming wants to have a competitive game where people earn their win rate.

Marcus_Aurelius66, on Jul 14 2019 - 05:44, said:

and now the game is in decline.

Every game declines over time. People have been predicting the death of WoT since 2011, none of them have been right yet.

Marcus_Aurelius66, on Jul 14 2019 - 05:44, said:

The simple fix is for matchmaker when it is drawing up the teams to spread the WN8 statistics even between the two teams.

1) That won't "fix" what you think it will.

2) Wargaming has said repeatedly that they will not have SBMM in Random battles, they prefer for Random battles to be competitive.

Marcus_Aurelius66, on Jul 14 2019 - 05:44, said:

How hard can that be?

Not hard at all, which everyone knows, including Wargaming. They are not refusing to use SBMM because it's hard, they're refusing because they don't like how it would change the game.

Marcus_Aurelius66, on Jul 14 2019 - 05:44, said:

Now we have team overwhelmed with either a loss or a win. Stupid attempt at coding imo.

That has nothing to do with the MM, it's because this game is single death per battle. All single death games play that way, with the losing team very often getting overwhelmed. That's what happens when you remove enemy guns from the field, momentum builds into a steam roller. That isn't "broken" and it can't be "fixed" by the MM, it's simply what happens in all single death games.

[the_dude_76]

Pipinghot, on Jul 14 2019 - 08:44, said:

 they prefer for Random battles to be competitive.

 

This makes no sense. They don't want it to be "competitive" they just want it to be random. If you put 5 NBA players on a team and matched them against 5 high school players there obviously wouldn't be anything "competitive" about that match up and yet the equivalent can and does happen here.

 

Block Quote

  That's what happens when you remove enemy guns from the field,

 

What you guys refuse to acknowledge is that having some 46%er with no clue camping the red line waiting for something to shoot at also "removes a gun from the field".  As does the 46%er who YOLO scouts, pushes a flank all alone, ect... If one team has more "lesser" players than the other the mismatch begins before any tanks are actually killed because the team with the most skilled players is going to be the one with the most active guns the VAST majority of the time.

[Ironclad73]

Matchmaking is better now than I've ever seen in my 5 years playing. Playing t8 is fun again and even in the lower tiers where it was normal to be bottom tier, now it is every so often. Playing in the middle of the night with few players online is different of course, but for the majority of the players it is good.

 

Sure streaks happen and sometimes games are stacked against one team but that is called R A N D O M, and evens out over time.

Of course there will always be those who can't learn to play who will look for anything else to blame besides looking at the person on their keyboard.

[3d0g]

This is supposed to be a game based on tank warfare.  In war you sometimes come up against green troops and sometimes against the Waffen SS or its equivalent.  It pisses me off when I get 6 or 7 losses to start my day, but generally, if I don't have a hissy fit and keep on playing, it evens up over the session.  I've been playing the game a long time and I suck, but, so what?  I don't suck every game and I am enjoying myself, WG is making some money off me and I am getting great value for my entertainment dollar.  Seems fair to me.

[Pipinghot]

the_dude_76, on Jul 14 2019 - 10:18, said:

Pipinghot, on Jul 14 2019 - 08:44, said:

 they prefer for Random battles to be competitive.

This makes no sense. They don't want it to be "competitive" they just want it to be random.

Of course it does, you're just ignoring that "competitive" means more than one thing. Every player who plays WoT has an equal opportunity to develop their skills, some choose to work at getting better, some choose not to. The people who choose to improve their skills win more often, they earn their competitive advantage and are better at competing.

 

Each individual game is random, but your long term results are not. Better players win more often, bad players lose more often, there's absolutely nothing random about the long term results. If you want to be more competitive, then make yourself a better competitor, that's how competition works.

the_dude_76, on Jul 14 2019 - 10:18, said:

you put 5 NBA players on a team and matched them against 5 high school players there obviously wouldn't be anything "competitive" about that match up and yet the equivalent can and does happen here.

Not in Randoms it doesn't. You have never had a battle that was the equivalent of your example, you're describing an absurdly extreme case and pretending that it happens when it doesn't. The only place in WoT where you will ever see a team of all experts against a team of all noobs are in the team modes, - Skirmishes, Tournaments, Clan Wars.

 

The simple reality, whether you like it or not, is that Random battles are never as extreme as you're describing. It's true that in a small number of battles the teams are severely mismatched, but even then it's not as extreme as your absurd example. Every time you over exaggerate like that you damage your credibility. The large majority of games in WoT are pretty balanced, falling into the 40-60% range for Chance to Win. And, again, even when the battles are outside those ranges they never come close to the absurd example you're proposing.

 

If you want to talk about Random battles then the least you can do is give honest examples.

the_dude_76, on Jul 14 2019 - 10:18, said:

Block Quote

  That's what happens when you remove enemy guns from the field,

What you guys refuse to acknowledge is that having some 46%er with no clue camping the red line waiting for something to shoot at also "removes a gun from the field".  As does the 46%er who YOLO scouts, pushes a flank all alone, ect... If one team has more "lesser" players than the other the mismatch begins before any tanks are actually killed because the team with the most skilled players is going to be the one with the most active guns the VAST majority of the time.

What you're failing to acknowledge is that those 46% players with no clue are pretty evenly distributed between the teams. You keep on presenting the idea that bad players are constantly stacked on teams against good players and that's simply not true, it's a dishonest picture of how the game works. Battles that are truly mismatched are rare, but you keep on talking about them as if they're the norm, which is false.

[the_dude_76]

 

Pipinghot, on Jul 14 2019 - 12:53, said:

Each individual game is random, but your long term results are not. Better players win more often, bad players lose more often, there's absolutely nothing random about the long term results. If you want to be more competitive, then make yourself a better competitor, that's how competition works.

  

In every competition, outside of some video games, competitors are matched by skill and/or experience with players moving up as they acquire that skill or experience. So no, in a general sense this is not how competition works.

 

Block Quote

 Not in Randoms it doesn't. You have never had a battle that was the equivalent of your example, you're describing an absurdly extreme case and pretending that it happens when it doesn't. The only place in WoT where you will ever see a team of all experts against a team of all noobs are in the team modes, - Skirmishes, Tournaments, Clan Wars.

 

Toss in 10 average players on each team and the analogy holds.

 

Block Quote

 The simple reality, whether you like it or not, is that Random battles are never as extreme as you're describing. It's true that in a small number of battles the teams are severely mismatched, but even then it's not as extreme as your absurd example

 

It's called hyperbole, surely you've heard of it and understand it's usage. I should know better than to use it here because it provides such a convenient excuse to those who don't have an actual counter argument or are just too lazy to present one.

 

Block Quote

 What you're failing to acknowledge is that those 46% players with no clue are pretty evenly distributed between the teams.

 

Sometimes. It's when they're not that the issue obviously arises.

 

Block Quote

 but you keep on talking about them as if they're the norm, which is false.

 

No I haven't. 

 

 

 

[Shoot_stuff1]

I beg to differ, MM is messed up.  You can't just match up tanks, you have to take into account the players record, wins, losses, experience, etc.  There are too many matches that end up 5-15 or 15-5 and either way it ends up is just messed up.  It makes the game no fun to play and if your players aren't having fun they are going to leave.  I've left once because of it and came back after the changes and it's not any better.  This is the way it seems to me.  I can play a lower tier match like 5 or 6 and below and have ok games but, the minute I go higher the matches are really sad.  I hate to win or lose by a massacre, it's just no fun.  You should make special matches like once a week that don't allow spamming premium ammo so players can learn the skill of aiming and the weaknesses and strengths of  their tanks and maybe some strategy.  The game is becoming like a cheap arcade game where you just run in and shoot.  It's just becoming no fun to play any more and that's just sad because it started out fun.  Try learning from other games on how to make it better for the players and not just your wallet.  You will get more players and in most games that equals to more money.  Just saying you need to do something or risk losing even more players.

[Pipinghot]

the_dude_76, on Jul 14 2019 - 15:15, said:

Pipinghot, on Jul 14 2019 - 12:53, said:

Each individual game is random, but your long term results are not. Better players win more often, bad players lose more often, there's absolutely nothing random about the long term results. If you want to be more competitive, then make yourself a better competitor, that's how competition works.

  In every competition, outside of some video games, competitors are matched by skill and/or experience with players moving up as they acquire that skill or experience. So no, in a general sense this is not how competition works.

No, in a general sense that's not how competition works. The world is full of examples of competitions that are not based on skill matching at all but instead are based on people's willingness to join the competition regardless of their skill level. There are tons of bowling leagues, softball and baseball leagues, and every other kind of league (including gaming leagues) under the sun that people join without any skill based matching and the results at the end of the season are based on who had more skill. The leagues that do the most work to match teams based on skill are professional leagues because they make their money from viewers, they are trying to keep eyeballs on the television watching their games so they can sell advertising. But in the zillions of leagues that make their money from participants, rather than from selling advertising, there's very little in the way of skill based matching. Either you've never participated in these kinds of leagues, which are much more common that skill based leagues, of you're forgetting your experiences with how those leagues operate.

 

Some sports include handicapping in their leagues (like bowling and golf), but they still force the least skilled players to play against the most skilled players without any regard for the skill difference. They include the handicap so that players are playing as much against themselves as they are against each other, but even the most generous handicap competition favors the more skillful players winning.

 

Sometimes a specific tournament will require a minimum amount of skill to enter the tournament, but that's not because they're trying to make all of the low-skilled player happy. They're using minimum skill as a bar to entry in order to promote their tournament as being "elite" in some fashion or because there are prizes at stake and they want to week out people/teams that would just bog down the tournament.

 

The most common place for skill based matchmaking in other competitions is in tournaments. And even then they're not doing it to make it more fun for the bad players/teams, they're doing it to help ensure that the most skillful players/teams will advance to the later rounds of the competition. When you seed a double-elimination tournament, for example, the top 1 & 2 ranked players/teams are matched up against the bottom 1 & 2 players/teams, they deliberately put the least skilled players/teams into the worst possible match up for their first game of the tournament.

 

Children's sports and activities do what you're saying (and rightly so), but in adult competitions, adult sports/games and adult leagues skill based matchmaking is the exception, not the rule.

the_dude_76, on Jul 14 2019 - 15:15, said:

Block Quote

 Not in Randoms it doesn't. You have never had a battle that was the equivalent of your example, you're describing an absurdly extreme case and pretending that it happens when it doesn't. The only place in WoT where you will ever see a team of all experts against a team of all noobs are in the team modes, - Skirmishes, Tournaments, Clan Wars.

Toss in 10 average players on each team and the analogy holds.

#1) No, you don't get to move the goalposts like that. You're argument was that in Random battles there are games that are the equivalent of an NBA team vs. a high school team. You don't get to fudge the numbers now and pretend that you only meant the top 5. You comparison was false and you don't get to weasel out of that by fudging the numbers.

 

#2) Even if we do let you move the goalposts, it's still doesn't hold. The number of battles in which the top 5 players are "pros" vs. the other top 5 players being noobs are still non-existent. Even battles with super low or super high odds of winning are not stacked as badly as your fictional example, you keep on trying to use examples that are simply not real. Yes, there are Random battles that are unbalanced, no they're not ever like an NBA team playing a high school team, even if we only count the top 5 players.

the_dude_76, on Jul 14 2019 - 15:15, said:

Block Quote

 The simple reality, whether you like it or not, is that Random battles are never as extreme as you're describing. It's true that in a small number of battles the teams are severely mismatched, but even then it's not as extreme as your absurd example

It's called hyperbole, surely you've heard of it and understand it's usage. I should know better than to use it here because it provides such a convenient excuse to those who don't have an actual counter argument or are just too lazy to present one.

Yes, which is exactly why your arguments are not valid. You resort to hyperbole and make up fake examples because real examples don't fit your false narrative. Hyperbole is a nice word for lying, you're making up lies about things that don't really exist in an attempt to manipulate the discusion in your favor. Every time you use hyperbole you're admitting that you're wrong because you can't make your case with honest information.

 

You should know better than to use hyperbole anywhere, not just here, because it's dishonest.

the_dude_76, on Jul 14 2019 - 15:15, said:

Block Quote

 What you're failing to acknowledge is that those 46% players with no clue are pretty evenly distributed between the teams.

Sometimes. It's when they're not that the issue obviously arises.

Not "sometimes", most of the time. The majority of battles you play are within a reasonable balance range, with 40%-60% chance of winning (which is just as good as any game hat uses SBMM). the number of battles that are outside of that win chance range is pretty small.

 

And even for the smaller number of battles that are unbalanced, it's usually not because of too many 46% players on one team, it's usually because the overall makeup of one team has a somewhat better player in most slots than the other team. It's not a matter of "too many 46% players" it's more a matter looking down the ranks and seeing blues vs. purple, greens vs. blue, yellows vs. greens, and so on, one team has a slight edge all the way down the ranks, which adds up to a big difference. Unless you're playing in low tiers the number of reds on the two teams isn't almost never what makes the difference in the team balance.

the_dude_76, on Jul 14 2019 - 15:15, said:

Block Quote

 but you keep on talking about them as if they're the norm, which is false.

No I haven't.

Yeah, you have, because those are the only battles you talk about, in addition to which you use dishonest hyperbole to make them seem even worse. You don't discuss any realistic view of how many battles are balanced vs. unbalanced, you don't give an honest description of how the teams are unbalanced or how much the teams are unbalanced. You continually talk only about unbalanced battles as if they are far more common than they really are and as if they are far more extreme than they really are.

Edited by Pipinghot, Jul 15 2019 - 01:34.

[Pipinghot]

Shoot_stuff1, on Jul 14 2019 - 16:12, said:

I beg to differ, MM is messed up.  You can't just match up tanks, you have to take into account the players record, wins, losses, experience, etc.  There are too many matches that end up 5-15 or 15-5 and either way it ends up is just messed up.  It makes the game no fun to play and if your players aren't having fun they are going to leave.  I've left once because of it and came back after the changes and it's not any better.  This is the way it seems to me.  I can play a lower tier match like 5 or 6 and below and have ok games but, the minute I go higher the matches are really sad.  I hate to win or lose by a massacre, it's just no fun.  You should make special matches like once a week that don't allow spamming premium ammo so players can learn the skill of aiming and the weaknesses and strengths of  their tanks and maybe some strategy.  The game is becoming like a cheap arcade game where you just run in and shoot.  It's just becoming no fun to play any more and that's just sad because it started out fun.  Try learning from other games on how to make it better for the players and not just your wallet.  You will get more players and in most games that equals to more money.  Just saying you need to do something or risk losing even more players.

And yet you've played over 25,000 games, spending at least 2,100 hours playing this game. Apparently they can match up tanks that way and yet you stayed to play this game a lot. There must be something about it you like.

 

Also, steamrolls/massacres are not caused by the MM, they are caused by single-death-per-battle. Changing the MM to SBMM would not "fix" massacres because the MM is not responsible for causing them.

[VooDooKobra]

Marcus_Aurelius66, on Jul 14 2019 - 03:44, said:

Matchmaking is broken, has been for years. Even though we have all told you how to fix it you ignore everyone, and now the game is in decline. The simple fix is for matchmaker when it is drawing up the teams to spread the WN8 statistics even between the two teams. How

hard can that be? Now we have team overwhelmed with either a loss or a win. Stupid attempt at coding imo.

 

please do not assume you speak for everyone.  what you should have said was "those of us that want skill based matchmaking have been upset you do not blindly do what we want"

 

Shoot_stuff1, on Jul 14 2019 - 14:12, said:

I beg to differ, MM is messed up.  You can't just match up tanks, you have to take into account the players record, wins, losses, experience, etc.  There are too many matches that end up 5-15 or 15-5 and either way it ends up is just messed up.  It makes the game no fun to play and if your players aren't having fun they are going to leave.  I've left once because of it and came back after the changes and it's not any better.  This is the way it seems to me.  I can play a lower tier match like 5 or 6 and below and have ok games but, the minute I go higher the matches are really sad.  I hate to win or lose by a massacre, it's just no fun.  You should make special matches like once a week that don't allow spamming premium ammo so players can learn the skill of aiming and the weaknesses and strengths of  their tanks and maybe some strategy.  The game is becoming like a cheap arcade game where you just run in and shoot.  It's just becoming no fun to play any more and that's just sad because it started out fun.  Try learning from other games on how to make it better for the players and not just your wallet.  You will get more players and in most games that equals to more money.  Just saying you need to do something or risk losing even more players.

 

even with sbmm you will still have blowouts, how much that would change is debatable.  close games are usually a result of one team being unable to take advantage of the other teams mistakes and even this would be complained about if it happened too much.  

[jst2gr8]

Shoot_stuff1, on Jul 14 2019 - 14:12, said:

I beg to differ, MM is messed up.  You can't just match up tanks, you have to *take into account the players record, wins, losses, experience, etc.  There are too many matches that end up 5-15 or 15-5 and either way it ends up is just messed up.  It makes the game no fun to play and if your players aren't having fun they are going to leave.  I've left once because of it and came back after the changes and it's not any better.  This is the way it seems to me.  I can play a lower tier match like 5 or 6 and below and have ok games but, the minute I go higher the matches are really sad.  I hate to win or lose by a massacre, it's just no fun.  You should make special matches like once a week that don't allow spamming premium ammo so players can learn the skill of aiming and the weaknesses and strengths of  their tanks and maybe some strategy.  The game is becoming like a cheap arcade game where you just run in and shoot.  It's just becoming no fun to play any more and that's just sad because it started out fun.  Try learning from other games on how to make it better for the players and not just your wallet.  You will get more players and in most games that equals to more money.  Just saying you need to do something or risk losing even more players.

For example. you want all players that have a 48% win rate in a match? If and only if they have the same  amount of experience than you? Please tell me how this would work not in any country but on any planet. The Que times would be so much longer for someone with a 52% win rate just because the system would then have to find 29 other tankers that have the same experience also. As stated in many other posts, SBMM will not work!!

Maybe it isn't the game that needs the changing. It always seem that players that are way below average are the ones that are trying to change the game to help them out. 

You mean, "special games for special people"? Isn't that what Frontline is about? There are plenty of sites to go to that show you the weak spots of tanks, where they are easily penned. Premium ammo is not a guarantee pen shot!!! You actually think that having these "special games" that it is going to help the below average player? No, no it won't. After a certain number of battles you would think that players would know where to shoot instead of relying on the right mouse button. 

Take your own advice and "try learning" the game. 25k battles and you are whining about not knowing where to shoot tanks. 

Any online game is in it for their wallets. Even Candy Crush, which states it is free to play just like WOT, gets paid. Some people want, not necessarily need, that advantage.  

WG changes something in the game every patch. I read about it, and watch videos on what they are doing. 

I have tried very hard to not look into your stats to see what kind of player you are but when you play most of your games at tier 6 you aren't going to learn the weak spots of all the tanks. You aren't going to get your PR better. There are steps you can take to get better but whining on a post about wanting free wins is not the way to do it.

[RingoMcHarrison]

Marcus_Aurelius66, on Jul 14 2019 - 07:44, said:

Matchmaking is broken, has been for years. 

 

How would you know? You've been playing for 4 months.

[Machisman]

Lucky ones to get good MM will never admit MM is broken. Because they get to see more wins than defeats. So everyone who is saying that MM is fine, will change their opinion when their winrate goes down the drain. Especially when they do not get wins while grinding a tank.

Anyone with decent IQ can play this game. If you see some bad players who camps with a super heavy or in a light tank, just blacklist them. Just try to do your best and do more damage.

Everyone thinks, WG doesnt look at your personal stats for MM. Its a lie. I dont have proof for it. however start observing from today. You will always see that good PR players will have better teams.

Once you improve your damage per game, you will start getting decent MM.

Tier 9 and Tier 10 has the worst MM interms of skill balancing. But who cares. Just try to shoot at enemy tanks and make sure to do damage. Things will fall in place and you will get to win more.

 

PS: Even better option, drink some beer and play. You wont be worried about defeats.

 

[FUBIS]

Marcus_Aurelius66, on Jul 14 2019 - 10:44, said:

Matchmaking is broken, has been for years. Even though we have all told you how to fix it you ignore everyone, and now the game is in decline. The simple fix is for matchmaker when it is drawing up the teams to spread the WN8 statistics even between the two teams. How hard can that be? Now we have team overwhelmed with either a loss or a win. Stupid attempt at coding imo.

Sorry WG I have to agree Matchmaking is broken! I keep hearing all this about playing better or getting better! Well how can you get better if almost all teams your on die and your left facing 7-8 opponents! OH YEA GET BETTER! I had quit playing for about 4-5 years and a friend said come on back so I did. 2-3 months ago I was at 48.48% WR now I am at 48.11WR! Yea WG fixed the matchmaker and it sucks! Wind up on a 7 to 10 game losing streak then try again next day and win 2 then 8 game losing streak, quit and try next day and win one lose one then 7 game losing streak and is all been the same [edited]! WG  Matchmaking is broke and trust me I am not the only one that thinks so. I try to stay positive and try to play better but guess what it just keeps going and going down! The only ones not complaining (surprise surprise ) are the ones winning on a consistent basis. I know am not a great player but come on this is BS!

[VooDooKobra]

FUBIS, on Jul 18 2019 - 19:13, said:

Sorry WG I have to agree Matchmaking is broken! I keep hearing all this about playing better or getting better! Well how can you get better if almost all teams your on die and your left facing 7-8 opponents! OH YEA GET BETTER! I had quit playing for about 4-5 years and a friend said come on back so I did. 2-3 months ago I was at 48.48% WR now I am at 48.11WR! Yea WG fixed the matchmaker and it sucks! Wind up on a 7 to 10 game losing streak then try again next day and win 2 then 8 game losing streak, quit and try next day and win one lose one then 7 game losing streak and is all been the same [edited]! WG  Matchmaking is broke and trust me I am not the only one that thinks so. I try to stay positive and try to play better but guess what it just keeps going and going down! The only ones not complaining (surprise surprise ) are the ones winning on a consistent basis. I know am not a great player but come on this is BS!

no MM will prevent losing streaks, its not going to happen

[Sokkies_1]

I think they must bring in players with the same stats against each other like 40% against 40% thats the only way you can work youre way up to get to 50% or higher.