Jump to content


Why Does MM Keep Stacking Teams?


  • Please log in to reply
457 replies to this topic

1LT_Dwayne #441 Posted Jul 23 2021 - 21:31

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 8086 battles
  • 200
  • Member since:
    02-13-2019

View PostNeatoMan, on Jul 23 2021 - 21:04, said:

Yep, they separate them.  They play in different leagues; leagues that are designed for their skill level.  

 

So then why do all these people keep asking for skill balance instead?

Well maybe the key to fix MM is remove random battles and make ranked available all the time with different league?



NeatoMan #442 Posted Jul 23 2021 - 21:51

    Major

  • Players
  • 31571 battles
  • 24,988
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View Post1LT_Dwayne, on Jul 23 2021 - 15:31, said:

Well maybe the key to fix MM is remove random battles and make ranked available all the time with different league?

ranked battles is a joke



Jer1413 #443 Posted Jul 23 2021 - 22:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 56283 battles
  • 2,639
  • [RR13] RR13
  • Member since:
    02-24-2013

View Postumkhulu, on Jul 23 2021 - 15:38, said:

 

But it would it teams were properly balanced!.... :)

 

 

 

Not really, MM would make sure there was somebody to die uselessly on the other team as well.

 



umkhulu #444 Posted Jul 23 2021 - 23:09

    Major

  • Players
  • 125 battles
  • 3,227
  • Member since:
    07-15-2017

View PostNeatoMan, on Jul 23 2021 - 21:04, said:

Yep, they separate them.  They play in different leagues; leagues that are designed for their skill level.  

 

So then why do all these people keep asking for skill balance instead?

 

Why ask the question when you already know the answer?....

 

Posted Image

 

Posted Image

 


Edited by umkhulu, Jul 23 2021 - 23:14.


NeatoMan #445 Posted Jul 23 2021 - 23:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 31571 battles
  • 24,988
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

Adjust the groupings by tier/population.

 

 


1LT_Dwayne #446 Posted Jul 24 2021 - 00:19

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 8086 battles
  • 200
  • Member since:
    02-13-2019

View Postumkhulu, on Jul 23 2021 - 23:09, said:

 

Why ask the question when you already know the answer?....

 

Posted Image

 

Posted Image

 

Make two or three leagues. Red-orange-yellow together and green-blue-purple in another league or Red alone in one league, orange-yellow and green-blue-purple.



ACandieCaneKilling #447 Posted Jul 27 2021 - 10:14

    Captain

  • Players
  • 77320 battles
  • 1,048
  • [TRIO] TRIO
  • Member since:
    10-15-2013

View Postumkhulu, on Jul 21 2021 - 07:59, said:

 

I have posted this before, but just for the record, the table below is an example of the data I collect after every battle. Most of the data comes from WoT's own battle reports and is stored in an SQL database by the WoTNumbers app (http://wotnumbers.com). I download each players PR (WGR or Wargaming Rating) from the WoT API and add it to the database then use Excel to present the data collected. I have used the same brackets and borrowed the colours from XVM for consistency, but the data itself is pure WoT.

 

Obviously, I can only show what fits on a page, but I have summarized the last 3000 or so battles to show that the more skilled team usually wins. This might be stating the obvious, but the truth of the matter is, that for a large majority of battles, the matchmaker is determining which team wins and which team loses. If ALL teams were balanced, then it would be up to the players themselves and NOT the matchmaker, who determined the outcome of each battle.... :)

 

Posted Image

 

Summary for the last 3000 battles.....

 

Posted Image

 

NOTE: In order to show that I am trying to be impartial, I have included some battles where the stronger team did NOT win. This is not surprising, since EU server seems to have an abundance of under-performing green and blue players!... :)

 

 

 

SO what you are saying is when the OTHER team wins, those people are NOT entitled to win their games? They have the same issue you do?? OH wait no they won their games, where are their stats and chart???


You seem to think there is ONLY ONE side to this argument, but from the other perspective, REVERSE those numbers, as if you were on the other teams and OMG LOOK, there is no imbalance or impartiality in your data cause it only shows YOUR POINT of view, hardly IMPARTIAL.

Did you collect the same date from the OTHER PLAYERS on the SO CALLED RED TEAM to see if their experiences are the same??? NOPE. You only chose YOUR side of the data. This is always the mistake of charting when you do not understand the math you are trying to use to draw a conclusion.

 

SINCE when are you entitled to win more than lose??? WHEN did this EVER become a thing? You dont get to win BASED ON ANY form of balance sheet, EVER... you have to WORK for it as a team, NOT just you. Your team loses not you.

Did you look at how this so called imbalanced effected YOUR PLAY? NO, ALL you focused on what how YOU LOST more than won.

 

Your data itself is not flawed in content, but in how you present it. & you are missing A TON more data, the other side of the coin in this case.

It is completely one sided and ONLY SHOWS games using data from the games so you can say; SEE this is straight from WOT.

SO WHAT???

You collected data but never once did you look at ALL THE other players in your so called STUDY, you just looked at a NARROW focus based on the premise YOU ARE NOT winning enough. That's NOT how you work a hypothesis.

You assumed based on your data that the teams are stacked BASED ON how YOU FAIRED, or your team faired, but you didn't look at how ALL THE OTHERS on the RED team did. They didn't lose. ONLY your team did.

 

Before you make a chart, first look at how you are presenting your data, is it one sided, is it ONLY showing data you collected from your games? Well then that means you fall back to my original mentioned flaw in your data.

You are NOT entitled to win or have great games, or even WELL MATCHED games. Why would you think you were??? MM matches the tanks, its not perfect, but it literally cannot Stack teams.

You are drawing the conclusion that MM is responsible for stacking better players on the RED team more so than on your green team, your team, but to the Red team, THEY ARE GREEN, so your data doesn't support their game at all.

 

Yes it is true the tank matching from MM is FAR from perfect, but it has ZERO to do with so called stacked teams. What your data shows is that the most popular tanks (due to them being fun to play and SUCCESSFUL) are often used by better players able to UTILISE them to their best abilities. Better players use tanks they can MAKE GOOD USE OF.

Your data is so ONE SIDED, its not even close to being conclusive IN ANY form let alone unbiased.

 

Mathematically speaking your data is NOT closely related to the conclusions you came up with either as your chart lacks an ALTERNATE opposing chart from the OTHER sides perspective. For your data to be correct, you have to see it from BOTH SIDES in the same game, and come to the same conclusion on BOTH CHARTS and you didnt do that.

 

NOTHING here shows anything you have concluded is correct. The only thing you have shown is what I said earlier about GOOD players Know what tanks to use more so than lesser experienced skilled players and can get the most out of them.

You are ONLY Looking at the GREEN TEAM SIDE and not BOTH sides, making your data FLAWED, and your conclusions very premature & INCORRECT.

sorry but this doesn't pan out at ALL to mean what you think it does.

 

WRONG conclusion based on in incomplete data collection, single sided chart & incorrect methodology. Also, your math is missing so much data, I don't know how you can come to any conclusion when you have left out so much necessary data.

Not trying to bash you, but you failed to take into account ALL the factors to prove your theory that being the same data from BOTH sides of that coin, must show the same conclusions & they dont and WONT.



da_Rock002 #448 Posted Jul 27 2021 - 14:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 14042 battles
  • 4,580
  • Member since:
    11-24-2016

View PostNeatoMan, on Jul 23 2021 - 15:51, said:

ranked battles is a joke

and random battles....   calling them random is a joke



NeatoMan #449 Posted Jul 27 2021 - 15:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 31571 battles
  • 24,988
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostACandieCaneKilling, on Jul 27 2021 - 04:14, said:

You seem to think there is ONLY ONE side to this argument, but from the other perspective, REVERSE those numbers, as if you were on the other teams and OMG LOOK, there is no imbalance or impartiality in your data cause it only shows YOUR POINT of view, hardly IMPARTIAL.

Did you collect the same date from the OTHER PLAYERS on the SO CALLED RED TEAM to see if their experiences are the same??? NOPE. You only chose YOUR side of the data. This is always the mistake of charting when you do not understand the math you are trying to use to draw a conclusion.

 ,,, 

 

WRONG conclusion based on in incomplete data collection, single sided chart & incorrect methodology. Also, your math is missing so much data, I don't know how you can come to any conclusion when you have left out so much necessary data.

Not trying to bash you, but you failed to take into account ALL the factors to prove your theory that being the same data from BOTH sides of that coin, must show the same conclusions & they dont and WONT.

Actually yes, it does collect data from the other team.

 

WoTNumbers collects the results from all 30 players in battle.  You can compare from the perspective of the winning team vs losing team.  You can see all the things that you just complained about.

 

As far as the conclusions about what it means.  yes they are way off, but not because the data is lacking, but the numbers he sees don't mean what he thinks they mean.



Spammy #450 Posted Jul 27 2021 - 15:32

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 80744 battles
  • 1,422
  • [4HIM] 4HIM
  • Member since:
    08-01-2010
I don't know about mm deliberately stacking games, I am not saying that happens, but I do know that mm has been kicking my tail for the last 3 or 4 days and in a big way.  I'm talking games where your team is so bad that you don't even get a chance to carry your own weight....your team gets overrun in the first couple of minutes.  My luck with mm these last few days has been very bad indeed.

umkhulu #451 Posted Jul 27 2021 - 19:05

    Major

  • Players
  • 125 battles
  • 3,227
  • Member since:
    07-15-2017

View PostACandieCaneKilling, on Jul 27 2021 - 10:14, said:

 

SO what you are saying is when the OTHER team wins, those people are NOT entitled to win their games? They have the same issue you do?? OH wait no they won their games, where are their stats and chart???


You seem to think there is ONLY ONE side to this argument, but from the other perspective, REVERSE those numbers, as if you were on the other teams and OMG LOOK, there is no imbalance or impartiality in your data cause it only shows YOUR POINT of view, hardly IMPARTIAL.

Did you collect the same date from the OTHER PLAYERS on the SO CALLED RED TEAM to see if their experiences are the same??? NOPE. You only chose YOUR side of the data. This is always the mistake of charting when you do not understand the math you are trying to use to draw a conclusion.

 

*** snip ***

 

If you hadn't got hold of the wrong end of the stick, I would have to agree with you...

 

Anyway, you are a promising candidate for the mfezi challenge.... send me the team names (or preferably IDs) for your last 100 battles. I am pretty confident that I will be able to guess which teams won for close to 68% of those 100 battles..... :)

 

 



DeviouslyCursed #452 Posted Jul 27 2021 - 19:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 11384 battles
  • 2,738
  • [5M0K3] 5M0K3
  • Member since:
    12-13-2018

View Postumkhulu, on Jul 27 2021 - 19:05, said:

 

If you hadn't got hold of the wrong end of the stick, I would have to agree with you...

 

Anyway, you are a promising candidate for the mfezi challenge.... send me the team names (or preferably IDs) for your last 100 battles. I am pretty confident that I will be able to guess which teams won for close to 68% of those 100 battles..... :)

 

 

 

You say that like it means something. 68%? You should get 50% with no data at all. No info on map, tier, tanks, players, player stats, etc.



umkhulu #453 Posted Jul 27 2021 - 19:37

    Major

  • Players
  • 125 battles
  • 3,227
  • Member since:
    07-15-2017

View PostDeviouslyCursed, on Jul 27 2021 - 19:29, said:

 

You say that like it means something. 68%? You should get 50% with no data at all. No info on map, tier, tanks, players, player stats, etc.

 

My challenge, my rules - would you like to accept?.... :)

 



Jer1413 #454 Posted Jul 27 2021 - 20:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 56283 battles
  • 2,639
  • [RR13] RR13
  • Member since:
    02-24-2013

View Postumkhulu, on Jul 27 2021 - 14:05, said:

I am pretty confident that I will be able to guess which teams won for close to 68% of those 100 battles..... :)

 

 

 

So what?

 



SKurj #455 Posted Jul 27 2021 - 22:54

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16863 battles
  • 5,167
  • [FEELZ] FEELZ
  • Member since:
    09-05-2010

would be curious to know how many players are in queue at any point in time....

the onscreen queue is always going to be 5 tiers with 2 below and 2 above your tier...(unless you are queued in t9+) and then once you throw in tank class...  map exclusions, game type exclusions...

 

I imagine that number is a lot smaller than many realize

 

 



DeviouslyCursed #456 Posted Jul 28 2021 - 06:18

    Major

  • Players
  • 11384 battles
  • 2,738
  • [5M0K3] 5M0K3
  • Member since:
    12-13-2018

View Postumkhulu, on Jul 27 2021 - 19:37, said:

 

My challenge, my rules - would you like to accept?.... :)

 

 

I will bet you, 1 to 10 ratio, that you can't predict who will win any given match. You win you get x, I win I get 10X. I mean, if the battles are as predictable as you are trying to make out, it shouldn't be a problem, right?



2Fantastic #457 Posted Jul 28 2021 - 08:46

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 11120 battles
  • 913
  • Member since:
    12-15-2010

Umkhulu: Did you think about how as you increase players numbers this cause push the prediction closer to 50%. 

 

This is interesting because there is a threshold at which sbmm and random mm will cause to the teams to almost be equally balanced.

 

Because right now 67% of games predicted by mm is not bad. Especially if you are concerned about your own impact on the game.

 

The other thing I think you mistake is as you push teams to both have a 50% chance of winning, I do not believe the amount a player can impact a game increases. I will actually have to think about this.....


Edited by 2Fantastic, Jul 28 2021 - 08:48.


GWyatt #458 Posted Aug 02 2021 - 18:45

    Captain

  • Players
  • 6000 battles
  • 1,749
  • [VAN] VAN
  • Member since:
    11-23-2015

View Post1LT_Dwayne, on Jul 23 2021 - 18:19, said:

Make two or three leagues. Red-orange-yellow together and green-blue-purple in another league or Red alone in one league, orange-yellow and green-blue-purple.

 

I'm going to jump back and address this, there is a problem. Let's assume that NA has 20,000 players on and all of them are hitting battle.

 

Given the chart provided by umkhulu, if you created 3 leagues, with just blue and purple in one of the leagues, there would be 200 players in that league. That would mean under ideal circumstances, at most, you might be able to create 6 concurrent arenas for the blue-purple league. (.1% + .9% = 1%, 200 is 1% of 20,000 and 200 / 30 = 6.6) Three leagues, even during prime time on NA will not work.

 

So how about 2 leagues, red-orange-yellow makes up 90%, so that works out to 18,000 in that league, with 2,000 in the Green-Blue-Purple. If the stars align then the GBP league could create 66 arenas, which is better, but would still be difficult if any of the GBP players are trying to get games in the low and mid tiers.

 

So what about ranked, isn't it a league type MM. Actually it is setup that way, but, it shows why leagues will not work for NA. If you look at what it should do, first put players of rank into battle from the queue, when it can't get enough of that rank, it pulls from the next lower rank, etc. If you look at what the teams actually looks like, you see a couple high rank, a couple next lower rank, and the rest even lower ranks. I can't say for sure, but in watching streamers playing ranked, it seemed that nearly 100% of rank battles ended up with teams composed of high, next lower ranks, and lower than that ranks.

 

Creating leagues outside of prime time in randoms would be highly improbable.

 

 

EDIT: I should add, I have no idea if the chart represents the break down of "colors" or not, but you can get the gist of what I'm saying about leagues in randoms.


Edited by GWyatt, Aug 02 2021 - 18:56.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users