34 replies to this topic

[MrBitcoin]

Why is matchmaking so one sided, there is no skill needed in playing this game. at the start of the game I can tell if my team is going to win or loss.

the matchmaking has started favoring the more skilled player, I see no other reason why they are mostly on one team.

9 out 10 game are one sided. I have come to this after 3 months of playing over 3000 premium games(mostly tri 8 - 10).. this is my thoughts.

I see there has been no new talk about Matchmaking since apr 2019

I want to know how many other people are in the same boat, looking for your thought?

[ArmorStorm]

It's RAAAAAAAAANDOM.  It HAS to be lopsided because the only way to make it reliably even would be to fix the matches.  The principle is called "Perfect IMbalance" as shown in the video below.

 

You can certainly disagree with WG's use and implementation of the principle, but given the HUGE number of players with 35000, 50000 battles or more (much more!) I think that they have pretty much proven that the times a player is favored is balanced by the times a player is disadvantaged and leads to people staying with the game.  

[GeorgePreddy]

Well... 9 of 10 games are NOT "one sided" as you claim, and only about 31% of battles END in a one sided way. That 31% is much more attributable to Lanchester's Law than anything MM does.

 

Work hard on your own playing abilities, if you get better you will see that your wins will increase, that's a natural fact that can't be denied by any reasonable mind.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[LeaveIT2Beaver]

In order for your statement to be true, WG would have had to devise an algorithm to use skill levels as well as vehicle and tier levels.  In order to "stack games" in favor of "better players", the wait times would be off the charts. 

Having dropped from 47.33 to 47%, I see the difference in the skill levels of the teams. But then too, I have learned not to care.  I just pew-pew and CHAI snipe 

 

(and I will not be spending any more money)

 

 

 

Edited by LeaveIT2Beaver, Sep 04 2019 - 02:49.

[heavymetal1967]

[Gothraul]

Just take a look at what drops on both teams and usually one side will have the better share of decent to good players though sometimes it will be fairly close to 50/50 however at least here it loves to dump a Lot of bots and bads on one side making for crap battles that end at the drop of a hat.

[rokinamerica]

heavymetal1967, on Sep 03 2019 - 17:55, said:

I see your no and raise you:

Spoiler

 

and another raise:

 

[tod914]

 

Spoiler

 

 

[InfinityGamer]

The matchmaker does not take player skill into consideration when forming teams. Any perceived bias in this regard is simply an artefact of random chance. If I averaged out the player skill of all my teams (excluding me) vs all the enemy teams I've fought, they would be statistically equal.

[da_Rock002]

InfinityGamer, on Sep 04 2019 - 02:49, said:

The matchmaker does not take player skill into consideration when forming teams. Any perceived bias in this regard is simply an artefact of random chance. If I averaged out the player skill of all my teams (excluding me) vs all the enemy teams I've fought, they would be statistically equal.

No, actually when something is ignored, it naturally occurs from one extreme to the other across the spectrum.

There are two teams in the battles.   Team skill is ignored by the MM.   So team skill will be unbalance from one team to the other across all the matchups being issued by the game.  There will be even matchups in the mix of course.      Skillful players dominate unskilled ones.   So whenever the matchups have one team or the other having more skilled players, the game mechanics reward those skilled players.    Since unskilled players do poorly with the mechanics, the matchups that happen with one team having more unskilled players aren't so good for those teams.

 

Yeah, there are two things that happen to go from one extreme to the other.    Significantly skilled, and significantly unskilled.    Thanks to the way the game mechanics work, both of those happen to reward the same class of player and not reward the other. 

 

WoT MM ignores skill.   It ignores team skill.    WoT mechanics happens to reward teams that have a skill advantage, no matter if it's caused by having a team with above average or there being a team with below average skill.      WG doesn't have to do a thing that causes imbalance.    Their ignoring it does the job whether or not WG even cares.

Edited by da_Rock002, Sep 04 2019 - 12:51.

[da_Rock002]

InfinityGamer, on Sep 04 2019 - 02:49, said:

The matchmaker does not take player skill into consideration when forming teams. Any perceived bias in this regard is simply an artefact of random chance. If I averaged out the player skill of all my teams (excluding me) vs all the enemy teams I've fought, they would be statistically equal.

If you averaged out the player skill of your teams, you think you'd get perfectly equal balance...

 

Do you remember what happens when one team is stacked with skilled players, right?

Do you remember what happens when one team is stacked with newbies and less skilled?

 

Those are the two simplest descriptions of the extremes that "balance out statistically equal", right.

 

So what happens in both of the "equally occurring" situations?      The same thing happens.   The results of both cases rewards one class of player and not the other.   Hey wait.....   One class of player gets rewards in BOTH CASES. 

 

Is it too simple for you to comprehend that no matter which team benefits from having more skilled players, allies or enemy, only one class of player is rewarded in both cases.

 

 

 

You're ignoring how WoT mechanics rewards skill and does not reward unskilled.    

 

 

Edited by da_Rock002, Sep 04 2019 - 12:52.

[Devil__Anse]

right...in a queue with 300 or less (more often than not 250 or less) 3 unplatooned deep purples are "randomly" ending up together with the frequency that I am personally seeing?  This isn't a tinfoil thing. I'm on the stacked team just as much as I face it.  But there has to be a reason that the MM logarithm does it the way it does. it has to benefit them somehow or they wouldn't do it that way.  warfailing does nothing by chance.  you don't become a billion dollar operation by chance. no grand conspiracy just my 2¢ 

[LeaveIT2Beaver]

[Jer1413]

da_Rock002, on Sep 04 2019 - 07:28, said:

No, actually when something is ignored, it naturally occurs from one extreme to the other across the spectrum.

There are two teams in the battles.   Team skill is ignored by the MM.   So team skill will be unbalance from one team to the other across all the matchups being issued by the game.  There will be even matchups in the mix of course.      Skillful players dominate unskilled ones.   So whenever the matchups have one team or the other having more skilled players, the game mechanics reward those skilled players.    Since unskilled players do poorly with the mechanics, the matchups that happen with one team having more unskilled players aren't so good for those teams.

 

Yeah, there are two things that happen to go from one extreme to the other.    Significantly skilled, and significantly unskilled.    Thanks to the way the game mechanics work, both of those happen to reward the same class of player and not reward the other. 

 

WoT MM ignores skill.   It ignores team skill.    WoT mechanics happens to reward teams that have a skill advantage, no matter if it's caused by having a team with above average or there being a team with below average skill.      WG doesn't have to do a thing that causes imbalance.    Their ignoring it does the job whether or not WG even cares.

 

da_Rock002, on Sep 04 2019 - 07:42, said:

If you averaged out the player skill of your teams, you think you'd get perfectly equal balance...

 

Do you remember what happens when one team is stacked with skilled players, right?

Do you remember what happens when one team is stacked with newbies and less skilled?

 

Those are the two simplest descriptions of the extremes that "balance out statistically equal", right.

 

So what happens in both of the "equally occurring" situations?      The same thing happens.   The results of both cases rewards one class of player and not the other.   Hey wait.....   One class of player gets rewards in BOTH CASES. 

 

Is it too simple for you to comprehend that no matter which team benefits from having more skilled players, allies or enemy, only one class of player is rewarded in both cases.

 

 

 

You're ignoring how WoT mechanics rewards skill and does not reward unskilled.    

 

 

 

 

Why should the "un-skilled" deserve any rewards? Isn't that the point of becoming skilled in any endeavor, to reap the rewards?

 

Your Marxism is showing.

 

[Says]

The poll is misleading...The answer is yes MM does make one team better than the other.  But its not by design to assist one of that team or to punish you but is a result of a  random selection of tank types by weight.  However, if you answer yes to the pole it makes it seem as though you mean that MM is intentionally benefiting one group over another for some reason.

Edited by Says, Sep 04 2019 - 14:59.

[Geek_Verve]

Of course it does...sometimes...you know, like a randomized process might. I would expect it to happen to some extent about twice as often as you might get perfectly balanced matches.

 

It doesn't need "fixing".

 

[Geek_Verve]

da_Rock002, on Sep 04 2019 - 06:42, said:

If you averaged out the player skill of your teams, you think you'd get perfectly equal balance...

 

Do you remember what happens when one team is stacked with skilled players, right?

Do you remember what happens when one team is stacked with newbies and less skilled?

 

Those are the two simplest descriptions of the extremes that "balance out statistically equal", right.

 

So what happens in both of the "equally occurring" situations?      The same thing happens.   The results of both cases rewards one class of player and not the other.   Hey wait.....   One class of player gets rewards in BOTH CASES. 

 

Is it too simple for you to comprehend that no matter which team benefits from having more skilled players, allies or enemy, only one class of player is rewarded in both cases.

 

You're ignoring how WoT mechanics rewards skill and does not reward unskilled.    

 

Is there some kind of point you're trying to make here? It sounds to me that you're trying to assert that players who aren't as good at the game don't get to win as much, and that is some sort of self-evident problem.

 

Shall WG hand out participation trophies while they're at it?

 

 

[GRINCH7777]

....the wheeled lights have substantially changed the game-play IMO......they are the most OP vehicle to be introduced into the game since I started playing.

[Kliphie]

GRINCH7777, on Sep 04 2019 - 10:11, said:

....the wheeled lights have substantially changed the game-play IMO......they are the most OP vehicle to be introduced into the game since I started playing.

 

Six of the top ten most tanks are SPGs, no games played in a wheelie.  Checks out.  

 

Not sure what that has to do with MM though.  

[Klaatu_Nicto]

heavymetal1967, on Sep 03 2019 - 17:55, said: