Jump to content


Has a different MM been previously tested?

Matchmaking

  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

Buttknuckle #21 Posted Aug 15 2019 - 02:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 52669 battles
  • 3,114
  • [GOONZ] GOONZ
  • Member since:
    03-19-2013

View Postdiego999, on Aug 14 2019 - 20:55, said:

Not in this game, but Armored Warfare tried SBMM. See how that went:

 

https://aw.my.com/us/news/general/developer-diary-matchmaker-and-skill

 

No one with a reasonable understanding of the math is surprised by the outcome of the experiment described therein.


 

View Postda_Rock002, on Aug 15 2019 - 01:00, said:

And you know the AW design team did a good job how?

And the AW programmers were better than WG's?


 


 

Good job succinctly demonstrating why trying to have an intelligent conversation with some members of the community is a complete waste of time.


 



MansterSasquach #22 Posted Aug 15 2019 - 15:29

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 4742 battles
  • 16
  • Member since:
    08-25-2017

That AW article and the next one about MM 2.0 were interesting. Definitely don't know what stat to use for the algorithm but win rate is probably too simplistic and their stats seem to back that up.

 

Has anyone made the chart about landslide victories (distribution of surviving tanks on the winning team from the MM 2.0 article) for a sample of WoT games? 

Especially if you look at what the numbers show versus how lots of games feel.



NeatoMan #23 Posted Aug 15 2019 - 15:35

    Major

  • Players
  • 28230 battles
  • 20,852
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostMansterSasquach, on Aug 15 2019 - 09:29, said:

That AW article and the next one about MM 2.0 were interesting. Definitely don't know what stat to use for the algorithm but win rate is probably too simplistic and their stats seem to back that up.

 

Has anyone made the chart about landslide victories (distribution of surviving tanks on the winning team from the MM 2.0 article) for a sample of WoT games? 

Especially if you look at what the numbers show versus how lots of games feel.

you mean like this?  this is using PR ratings to show balance.  You'll find margin of victory results about halfway down the first post.

 

http://forum.worldof...s-your-battles/



MansterSasquach #24 Posted Aug 15 2019 - 16:32

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 4742 battles
  • 16
  • Member since:
    08-25-2017

Edit: IDK what happened to the actual text of the previous post.

 

That table with the margin of victory is what I was looking for. Just without the bins and shown as a distribution like the battle time directly below it. So a similar form to what you've shown NeatoMan.


Edited by MansterSasquach, Aug 15 2019 - 16:35.


BlaqWolf #25 Posted Aug 15 2019 - 17:52

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 22465 battles
  • 522
  • [W--W] W--W
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011

View PostMansterSasquach, on Aug 14 2019 - 09:12, said:

I don't want this to be a rant thread for or against 'skill based' or 'skill balanced' or some kind of binned MM or people saying to never change it and whatnot. 

 

Looking through the forum lots of people pray to the random MM and many others curse it but has any type of different matchmaking been attempted?

 

Not asking about changes that have been made to templates and tiers but radical MM stuff when it comes to the individuals in a particular battle.

 

I know there used to be way higher spread on the tiers too. I'm not asking about that and how much better/worse it is now. And yes, platoons would be difficult for the MM too. I just don't think you ax a whole MM because of fail/carry platoons.

[skill can be defined by WN8 or WR or WTR, whatever you deem appropriate]

 

Edit: Fixed the grammar on the title

Yes.  They're always tweaking the MM, even between major iterations that we see.  Most of the changes take place deep in the background we'll never see.
Generally, they're trying to find out ways to make the teams completely unbalanced in favor of the 'high skill' set so that they'll stay in the game and spend more money.  The tomatoes they want to keep together as much as possible to provide cannon fodder.  The average players get f*ed in the middle, not 'good enough' to be on the all-skill team, but good enough to not always be on the tomato team (just most often).
The amount of money spent also helps push you toward the better team, but not by much.



Flarvin #26 Posted Aug 15 2019 - 17:57

    Major

  • Players
  • 55057 battles
  • 17,138
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View PostBlaqWolf, on Aug 15 2019 - 11:52, said:

Yes.  They're always tweaking the MM, even between major iterations that we see.  Most of the changes take place deep in the background we'll never see.
Generally, they're trying to find out ways to make the teams completely unbalanced in favor of the 'high skill' set so that they'll stay in the game and spend more money.  The tomatoes they want to keep together as much as possible to provide cannon fodder.  The average players get f*ed in the middle, not 'good enough' to be on the all-skill team, but good enough to not always be on the tomato team (just most often).
The amount of money spent also helps push you toward the better team, but not by much.

 

How does one become ‘high skill’, if the MM is being rigged? 



Copacetic #27 Posted Aug 16 2019 - 03:19

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 48711 battles
  • 1,722
  • [ZEUS] ZEUS
  • Member since:
    02-04-2014

View PostFlarvin, on Aug 15 2019 - 17:57, said:

 

How does one become ‘high skill’, if the MM is being rigged?

cause ten foyal!



Nixeldon #28 Posted Aug 17 2019 - 23:34

    Major

  • Players
  • 60993 battles
  • 2,330
  • Member since:
    10-30-2011
Wargaming is supposed to have run closed tests in 2014-2015 according to developer comments posted on For the Record.





Also tagged with Matchmaking

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users