Jump to content


The REAL problem with WOT MatchMaking. Hope you read it.

MM

  • Please log in to reply
70 replies to this topic

AllieOop2 #21 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 03:33

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 14 battles
  • 1,472
  • Member since:
    02-22-2019

View Postrookiecan, on Jan 04 2020 - 03:23, said:

No I'm not going down that road...honestly.  I had just read a number of his posts on other topics and all his comments are similar.  I saw your post earlier and was about to reply to yours.  It's fine to go down the road of looking squarely at myself and you make a good observation on my stats and especially with lights and arty.  Mishkas also made some good points and I intend on trying some of them as I will with yours.   I guess my little rant is out of frustration the last 3 day....didn't play tonight and will take some time off.  Thanks for your advice.


Just going from my experience sir. I made a lot of analysis on my on won/loss suck stats. Same MM same driver an I have now had a couple of months of high 50s win rate. Never going to be Purple guy but that's fine I contribute. I have improved by being honest with myself about where I suck and where I am just as good as I will ever be an live with it. I can say on EU, is a different play style the penalizes aggressive play, my over aggressive approach, impatient and playing my tanks to their weakness often times caused me some grief. Try looking thru your garage and bottom-line is do you enjoy a tank if so find out its strengths and match your play with it. Fun enjoy the game that I hope is why you log on be that stats or blowing stuff up.


Edited by AllieOop2, Jan 04 2020 - 03:37.


Gr8Kh4l1 #22 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 03:40

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 18844 battles
  • 366
  • [-_W_-] -_W_-
  • Member since:
    04-03-2015

View PostAllieOop2, on Jan 03 2020 - 20:33, said:


Just going from my experience sir. I made a lot of analysis on my on won/loss suck stats. Same MM same driver an I have now had a couple of months of high 50s win rate. Never going to be Purple guy but that's fine I contribute. I have improved by being honest with myself about where I suck and where I am just as good as I will ever be an live with it. I can say on EU, is a different play style the penalizes aggressive play, my over aggressive approach, impatient and playing my tanks to their weakness often times caused me some grief. Try looking thru your garage and bottom-line is do you enjoy a tank if so find out its strengths and match your play with it. Fun enjoy the game that I hope is why you log on be that stats or blowing stuff up.

 

Sorry but regardless of how many battles you think you've analyzed for yourself, that sample size is WAY to small and skewed to one player. Purely anecdotal assessment.

 

 



Suicidal_Enemy #23 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 03:57

    Captain

  • Players
  • 50079 battles
  • 1,663
  • Member since:
    12-01-2013

View PostAllieOop2, on Jan 03 2020 - 22:13, said:


Now your going down another road of lash back posts that don't agree with you. Nice job of actually not looking in the mirror first. I like Claus and I cant stand Clickbaby but each has their won agenda and that get views.

For a game that is 10 years old and by historic standards one of the top 10 in longevity is frankly an ignorant comment by anyone. It is a classic now. It has more or less stabilized again. May well show a trend back up for a bit. I saw about 15 commercials for it on TV this past week featuring a Rudy. World Of Warcraft, Eve to name a couple have little on longevity and a bit on success over WoT but not much for PC games.


I'd take you seriously if you didn't hide behind an alt like a coward.



GeorgePreddy #24 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 03:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 14680 battles
  • 14,391
  • Member since:
    04-11-2013

WG's answer to suggestions like yours, OP.

 

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!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



AllieOop2 #25 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 04:13

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 14 battles
  • 1,472
  • Member since:
    02-22-2019

View PostGr8Kh4l1, on Jan 04 2020 - 03:40, said:

 

Sorry but regardless of how many battles you think you've analyzed for yourself, that sample size is WAY to small and skewed to one player. Purely anecdotal assessment.

 

 


30,000 matches on EU MM for an assessment of personal improvement is to small for you huh?


Edited by AllieOop2, Jan 04 2020 - 04:13.


AllieOop2 #26 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 04:16

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 14 battles
  • 1,472
  • Member since:
    02-22-2019

View PostSuicidal_Enemy, on Jan 04 2020 - 03:57, said:


I'd take you seriously if you didn't hide behind an alt like a coward.


For the last time sir and this is the last time for you. I PLAY ON EU AND THEY DON'T LET ME USE THAT ACCOUNT FOR HERE.

I enjoy NA forums not EU white bread chat.

Your stupid coward remark is old worn out an ignorant but that's just my opinion.

 

Now please feel free to point out anything in my comments that are incorrect. Feel free to its called a discussion.

 

Perhaps as I have told you before don't read them or put me on ignore. So far as you taking me seriously I can absolutely say I do not give a damn. have great night sir.


Edited by AllieOop2, Jan 04 2020 - 04:21.


Gr8Kh4l1 #27 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 04:25

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 18844 battles
  • 366
  • [-_W_-] -_W_-
  • Member since:
    04-03-2015

View PostAllieOop2, on Jan 03 2020 - 21:13, said:


30,000 matches on EU MM for an assessment of personal improvement is to small for you huh?

 

YES, way to f'n small. The player base is over 1 million world wide. Your skewed stats for one player on the maps you only play in the tanks you only play is nothing compared to the analytics and heat maps that WG uses to assess game play. About 8 years ago they had an artical in SD Times (Software Development Times) where they dicussed the TBs of game play data they analyze. 

 

So yes. you're measly assessment of 30k games is nothing.

 

And HOLY SHEEEET, i just found the article. https://sdtimes.com/altiscale/big-data-bigger-competition/



AllieOop2 #28 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 04:27

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 14 battles
  • 1,472
  • Member since:
    02-22-2019

View PostGeorgePreddy, on Jan 04 2020 - 03:59, said:

WG's answer to suggestions like yours, OP.

 

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, so does SBMM there is an element of randomness to each battle,So would SBMM and the thrill that comes with it is what we all love Not everyone George you dont speak for the mass about Random Battles. Everyone gets a chance to become a hero,So would they in SBMM to prove their worth playing against people with different battle histories. It wouldn’t be possible with skill-based matchmaking.Yes it would George just the setup would vary

 

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!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


George George George please stop trying to be funny or an advocate you really suck at both. I am not a SBMM advocate. I don't think it will fix a thing an may screw things up more.



Avalon304 #29 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 04:34

    Major

  • Players
  • 24792 battles
  • 10,498
  • [SNPAI] SNPAI
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View Postrookiecan, on Jan 03 2020 - 19:10, said:

First, Claus is a solid Blue Player with even better WN8 and recent WR than you and you are also a solid blue player.

 

 

Claus is a terrible player. Hes also an idiot who very frequently doesnt understand how the game actually functions. He should never be listened to.

 

To answer the one question you asked in that wall of text that was the OP: Would I rather be in a close nail biter of a battle or a stomp? A stomp... close battles are stressful and would be genuinely unfun if they were the status quo for this game.

 

And whats worse is the problem you have (the battles that end 5-15 or 1-15) wont be solved by any form of SBMM. Because they arent caused by a disparity in skill.

 

MM is fine as it is: it treats everyone the same. It builds teams where everyone is an equal part. Then its up to you to help influence the battle positively.



Bhutt_Potato #30 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 04:42

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 6707 battles
  • 331
  • [LARRY] LARRY
  • Member since:
    07-21-2013

View PostAvalon304, on Jan 03 2020 - 21:34, said:

 

Claus is a terrible player. Hes also an idiot who very frequently doesnt understand how the game actually functions. He should never be listened to.

 

To answer the one question you asked in that wall of text that was the OP: Would I rather be in a close nail biter of a battle or a stomp? A stomp... close battles are stressful and would be genuinely unfun if they were the status quo for this game.

 

And whats worse is the problem you have (the battles that end 5-15 or 1-15) wont be solved by any form of SBMM. Because they arent caused by a disparity in skill.

 

MM is fine as it is: it treats everyone the same. It builds teams where everyone is an equal part. Then its up to you to help influence the battle positively.

 

You, you're good my friend.



AllieOop2 #31 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 04:43

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 14 battles
  • 1,472
  • Member since:
    02-22-2019

View PostGr8Kh4l1, on Jan 04 2020 - 04:25, said:

 

YES, way to f'n small. The player base is over 1 million world wide. Your skewed stats for one player on the maps you only play in the tanks you only play is nothing compared to the analytics and heat maps that WG uses to assess game play. About 8 years ago they had an artical in SD Times (Software Development Times) where they dicussed the TBs of game play data they analyze. 

 

So yes. you're measly assessment of 30k games is nothing.

 

And HOLY SHEEEET, i just found the article. https://sdtimes.com/altiscale/big-data-bigger-competition/


Sorry but I have not a clue as to what you wrote applies to my personal improvement or the OPs improvement as I was talking to him about. But if you think WGs heat maps are a key to me improving send them lol.



Bhutt_Potato #32 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 04:51

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 6707 battles
  • 331
  • [LARRY] LARRY
  • Member since:
    07-21-2013

View PostGr8Kh4l1, on Jan 03 2020 - 21:25, said:

 

YES, way to f'n small. The player base is over 1 million world wide. Your skewed stats for one player on the maps you only play in the tanks you only play is nothing compared to the analytics and heat maps that WG uses to assess game play. About 8 years ago they had an artical in SD Times (Software Development Times) where they dicussed the TBs of game play data they analyze. 

 

So yes. you're measly assessment of 30k games is nothing.

 

And HOLY SHEEEET, i just found the article. https://sdtimes.com/altiscale/big-data-bigger-competition/

 

Not the correct use of your but that article though.

 

Stale as that article may be, it is interesting but I'd love to read a similar article that uses today's practices in storing, monitoring and assessing data. 


Edited by Bhutt_Potato, Jan 04 2020 - 04:53.


NeatoMan #33 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 05:28

    Major

  • Players
  • 29114 battles
  • 21,456
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

in the month of december I played 341 battles.  29% were blowouts, with an average battle duration of 7:08 min.  

 

It's right in line with what I got over the last 2 years considering the tiers I played.   Same as it ever was for me.  Always is whenever I check.



dunniteowl #34 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 05:53

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 31544 battles
  • 9,404
  • Member since:
    09-01-2014

I think you have nailed the real issue in your OP, OP.  You know you're not that good of a player.  There is a remedy to the issue and it's not futzing with MM.  

 

The WoT Welcome Package (version 1) has the keys to your improvement.

 

As to blowout battles that are short:  Nature of the game.  Since I started in 2014, this game has provided me very few LONG battles.  There have been some terrible moments, to be sure, however most matches, since I started playing last anywhere from 3 to 8 minutes of 15 minutes and in some cases 10 minute limits.

 

Blowouts are NOT MM's fault.  The format of the game, in academic terms is this:  It is a single death, zero spawn, non-HP regenerating per battle format.  This means each hit you take reduces your chances of staying in the game.  Each kill on your team reduces your chances of winning.  For the Red Team, the same things are true.


This means, that, depending on how well you play and how well you are aware of the what's actually going on across the map, you can improve your win chances in this format.

 

One of the reasons I really like this game is the Random MM.  The changes to MM that have been made since I started playing are okay as far as that goes, though, truth be told, I was OKAY and HAPPY with the pre-.9.14 MM changes, pre-templates, pre-tank type balancing, pre ONLY -2(1)/+2 MM and pre-3 only arty limits.  I was totally FINE with that.

 

Oddly, I am totally FINE with how it currently is as well, though I truly would prefer it the way it was.  Even with Wheeled Vehicles.

 

Change happens.  You pretty much can't get away from it.  Personal change happens, too.  Sometimes, that personal change is dependent on how you perceive the changes around you and how you adapt to it.  Instead of asking for things to change in your favor *(which is usually a nice thing to have) from outside sources, try ensuring that the change that comes from within is foremost in your actions.

 

This requires a harder path than simply waiting for things to get better, though it is also much more worthwhile when you see the results of taking action and control of your future.

 

Yes, even if it's only in some 'stupid' pixel game, taking control of your agency is still very worthwhile.  I offer you one last thing in this endeavor to reclaim your agency: The WoT Welcome Package (version 1)

 

Read it, learn from it, follow the sage advice you find in there. I did and it really helped a LOT in terms of my ability to have fun in this game.  Oddly enough, I also learned to play much better from it as well.  Who, who, whoo would have thought that learning how the game worked would not only improve my performance, it also increased my FUN!

 

Maybe it can do that for you, too.

 


GL, HF & HSYBF!
OvO



Knagar #35 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 06:11

    Captain

  • Players
  • 23021 battles
  • 1,998
  • Member since:
    05-13-2011
I've got a crazy theory here, maybe it's the overwhelming number of poor players who can't be asked to get good at WoT, who are clogging the game up and giving bad results.

And that's fine, it's free to play, you do you and have fun. Their isn't a gun to your head, nothing is on the line. When you stop focusing on stats and so on, the game gets a lot more fun.

With that said, it doesn't hurt to try and improve your WoT game. You can take pride in being good at WoT even though it's a video game. People have this twisted idea that you can't be proud of yourself at being good in a video game, but you can.

VooDooKobra #36 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 06:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 10150 battles
  • 6,537
  • [W-UN2] W-UN2
  • Member since:
    04-23-2011

View PostBrynar, on Jan 03 2020 - 18:58, said:

I agree the current MM is broken and a balanced MM would mitigate much of the blow-out games to everyone's enjoyment. Here is the rub: the WG developers panders to a group of loudmouth unicums that seem certain that a balanced MM will hurt their stats. Yupp, you heard that right. Their stats are more important than you, me and the other 99% of players trying to have fun in this game. To them we're just daisies waiting to be picked each game.

even with a perfectly balanced MM you still have the snowball effect to contend with.  a balanced start does not mean you will have more balanced endings.  this is where games use mechanics like respawns and health regen



SwollenOstrich #37 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 07:46

    Captain

  • Players
  • 26965 battles
  • 1,969
  • Member since:
    02-28-2014

I don't understand what the problem is with MM.

 

I pay my premium time, mail a monthly bonus to WGNA and I get MM that gives me results like today ... included starting the day 11 straight wins across all tiers to finish up the daily  tank rewards missions. :trollface:

 



deter77 #38 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 09:55

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 15756 battles
  • 22
  • [1-NUB] 1-NUB
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011

View PostGeorgePreddy, on Jan 04 2020 - 02:59, said:

WG's answer to suggestions like yours, OP.

 

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!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It must have lost something in the translation from the original Russian.

 

I find it difficult to believe anyone could have written that in all seriousness, lol.



Slimrock #39 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 11:53

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 27570 battles
  • 97
  • [70] 70
  • Member since:
    03-04-2012

MM in this state is hurting the game, I dont like getting rolled and I dont like a roll over.  Do you remember the games that you killed 6 tanks and it was a rollover were your team lost 2 or 3 and then enemy was destroyed or the ones that were close and you won with getting the last couple kills to cap it.  I like close games, they are intense, it is why battle ground games are so popular.  It gets your blood pumping and in a good way, not because your entire team of window lickers formed a column to drive into enemy TD crossfire.

 

EVERY game in NA uses skill mm, except this one and it is getting worse.  I have 3 or 4 friends that have quit saying it just isnt fun anymore.

 

Dont tell me they fixed it, MM should be an ongoing process that is crucial to game longevity.  When it fails to be fun people leave and a game eventually dies.  Dont tell me that NA doesnt matter either because I would bet we pay a crap ton more per player then other regions.  If not why keep servers here for the much lower numbers playing(15-20 K peaks).  I dont care of they are a Russian company because like all companies they want and need a NA presence to keep coin flowing into the coffers.



NeatoMan #40 Posted Jan 04 2020 - 15:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 29114 battles
  • 21,456
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostSlimrock, on Jan 04 2020 - 05:53, said:

MM in this state is hurting the game, I dont like getting rolled and I dont like a roll over.  Do you remember the games that you killed 6 tanks and it was a rollover were your team lost 2 or 3 and then enemy was destroyed or the ones that were close and you won with getting the last couple kills to cap it.  I like close games, they are intense, it is why battle ground games are so popular.  It gets your blood pumping and in a good way, not because your entire team of window lickers formed a column to drive into enemy TD crossfire.


People want to win battles on their own terms.  They don't want to have to adapt to the meta.   Some people want to hide all game, so they don't have to fight it out with the crowd, and then swoop in at the end when it's close to get their blood pumping.  Never mind that others get their blood pumping by being the ones to force a breakthrough at the front of the battle.  Sometimes you have to accept that one play style doesn't fit every game, and adapt accordingly.

 

I suspect that those players always play snipers at the periphery of the battlefield, picking off others who stray too far from the melee.  They never like it when the guy with the tommy gun surprises them in their safe place.







Also tagged with MM

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users