Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Original_Prankster

What do you think about this change to Match Making?

  • You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.

CHANGE MATCHMAKING   80 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you be ok with WG using your stats as well as the tier of your ship for matchmaking in order to even out the teams better.

    • yes
      33
    • no
      47

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

44 posts in this topic

In order to better balance teams in Random Battles,  I feel that WG not only needs to consider the tier of the ships but the overall skill level of the player in the ships in Que. I know it can be done and it can be done fast enough not to cause a long wait time for a game. Right now it seems like the battles are too one sided and not as much fun. Win or Lose. Too many good players on one side and or too many bad players on the other. 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More complex, slower, and makes stats meaningless. No thanks.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah. Match-making is mostly fine the way it is. If stats were taken into account, it wouldn't be 'Random Battle' anymore.


2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more you turn middle of the road players away the faster the population will plummet. :look:

 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure this is called "SIMM" or "Skill Influenced Match Making".

 

Armored Warfare tried that out once.

 

You can see how well that worked out for them. :sceptic:

 

 Answer is a resounding HELLLLLL NAW btw

 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing this MM needs, and it had that once before it get removed for no reason, is that they take into account the nationality of ships. So that situations like 3 Bensons vs 3 Kagerous don't happen any longer.


1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I Really do not understand where you all are coming from. How would it make stats meaningless? Why would "middle of the road players leave" (and by the way I am a middle of the road player)? Maybe I am being unclear. Let me give an example. let says there is 90 people in Que and 30 of them are in your range. It would pick 24 as normal, but once it did then it would try to make sure that not too many of a certain skill level were on one side. So you do not end up with a lopsided battle. I happened to talk to a guy just today who worked for Relic as a game developer and he said that was pretty standard for online games. He was surprised WG did not have this already built into their matchmaking. 

 

I do find it a bit funny that MOST of you who are against it have really good stats. Like close to if not above 60% win rates and the rest of your stats look pretty damn good too.  Afraid you won't be able to maintain those numbers if the game was more balanced by skill? Won't be able to kick the crap out of newbie inexperienced players as much? 


3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know, it seems like a good ideal on paper... But for people like me I'm all over the place.

 

Some battles i do great, While other battles I completely flop

 

stats isn't a great indicator of who's more skilled in every battle... It may not work in practice...but I'm on the fence.

by being with more skilled players, you can watch and see how they kill you and try not to repeat what made you so easy to kill the next battle. For some, this kind of MM might hinder their ability to watch and learn.

 

Just my unorganized thoughts

 

However, I would like to see a mode for Nation v. Nation MM :)

Edited by JB_24

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm relieved to see the majority of the community is opposed to skill-based matchmaking. It's too stressful for me. I think the seasonal "Ranked Battles" mode is enough.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While my experience with WoW is more limited than with WoT, I suspect the same issues are at fault here that are in WoT.  The main one is, as you increase tiers, the lower tier players / ships in a game become increasingly worthless to the outcome.  This is definitely statistically provable in WoT.  If you are in a Tier X, IX, VIII battle the tier VIII vehicles, other than light tanks as scouts, are worthless.  You can't significantly impact the outcome and are basically a target.

There are two reasons for this:

First, your Tier VIII vehicle has so many fewer HP than the Tier X's (in particular) that they can steamroller you on HP alone.

The second issue is that all too frequently your Tier VIII gun and armor are so inferior that you can't do any significant damage to the Tier X and even IX vehicles while these tear you apart with ease.

I think from what I've seen with WoW the same applies here.  At upper tiers the ships have so many HP, are increasingly longer ranged, increasingly accurate, and have both more HP and more firepower (damage per hit) that they are exponentially ​better than the ships players in the game have that are a tier or two lower.  At the low tiers, this makes little or no difference.  The differences in statistics for the ships is smaller and they are not so mismatched.

So, all that really need be done is limit games starting at about Tier V or VI such that they aren't forced into games with ships two tiers higher.  At Tiers 8, 9, 10 the limitation should be no more than one tier down in a game.

No skill based matching necessary.

Edited by Murotsu

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

matchmaking takes long enough now, I don't want to add another calculation.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

matchmaking takes long enough now, I don't want to add another calculation.

 

Wouldn't you prefer to have a better match that gives you a chance to make a difference?  Nothing like being a tier V in a tier VII game and knowing that to do anything, you will have to work your tail off to make something happen and one mistake, you are done.  The largest issue is the two tier range difference.  Look at what the stats are and what the ships are capable of.  Eliminating that would balance the ability to do something in the game, along with not slow MM down horribly.  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Wouldn't you prefer to have a better match that gives you a chance to make a difference?  Nothing like being a tier V in a tier VII game and knowing that to do anything, you will have to work your tail off to make something happen and one mistake, you are done.  The largest issue is the two tier range difference.  Look at what the stats are and what the ships are capable of.  Eliminating that would balance the ability to do something in the game, along with not slow MM down horribly.

 

No, I wouldn't.

Tiers 5 and 6 aren't the ONLY tiers where you see +2 matchmaking;

that happens from tier 5 on up,

with some "special" ships getting "special" matchmaking.

Unless you implement +1 matchmaking across the boards, the problem will never be solved,

and if you DO implement +1 matchmaking across the boards,

the game will slow down a lot because the player population isn't big enough to support it.

(I actually thought out my answer BEFORE I posted it)


1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never seen a fair Navy engagement.  You have the exact same ships on both teams.  That never happens in the real world.  Just ask any Navy WW2 vet.  I think you need to mix it up more.  One thing I absolutely hate is your disappearing ships.  That is an absolute game killer for me.  If you want to do that, start a new game and call it "Star Wars".  


1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say no because it just confuses MM more and divisions will [edited]with it so hard, if me and a couple unicum guys from my clan div up our team would be potato and the other team would be okayish as a result. Especially with divs SBMM is not a good idea for pubs.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I wouldn't.

Tiers 5 and 6 aren't the ONLY tiers where you see +2 matchmaking;

that happens from tier 5 on up,

with some "special" ships getting "special" matchmaking.

Unless you implement +1 matchmaking across the boards, the problem will never be solved,

and if you DO implement +1 matchmaking across the boards,

the game will slow down a lot because the player population isn't big enough to support it.

(I actually thought out my answer BEFORE I posted it)

 

​Then MM should simply make smaller sides in a battle.  If the roster can't be filled what's wrong with say 6 on 6 or 8 on 8 instead?  It's already that way with the Coop matches.  Better a game with more evenly matched ships (not necessarily players) where your skill as a player is the dominant factor rather than being in a far better ship and seal clubbing.

In fact, that isn't all that bad an idea.  Since you'd never know if you're going into a game with 6 or 15 ships, or something in between, the strategies you'd have to employ would be more varied.  The importance of any one ship on your side could be magnified or diminished with that happening.

Imagine going into a game with five same tier destroyers and a single carrier on each side.  That'd be totally different from a 15 ship game where there are BB, CA, CL, and DD along with a CV or two mixed together.  Two totally different strategies involved to win.

Edited by Murotsu

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

​Then MM should simply make smaller sides in a battle.  If the roster can't be filled what's wrong with say 6 on 6 or 8 on 8 instead?  It's already that way with the Coop matches.  Better a game with more evenly matched ships (not necessarily players) where your skill as a player is the dominant factor rather than being in a far better ship and seal clubbing.

In fact, that isn't all that bad an idea.  Since you'd never know if you're going into a game with 6 or 15 ships, or something in between, the strategies you'd have to employ would be more varied.  The importance of any one ship on your side could be magnified or diminished with that happening.

Imagine going into a game with five same tier destroyers and a single carrier on each side.  That'd be totally different from a 15 ship game where there are BB, CA, CL, and DD along with a CV or two mixed together.  Two totally different strategies involved to win.

 

that used to happen during CBT; unevenly balanced matches, matches that involved 4 or 5 different tiers, all manner of unregulated nonsense. I would much rather have it the way it is now.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my view on this is that yes we get alot bad players at times but i think if they want to make it better just make it  so that tier 6 does not end up with 8s cap it at 7s   so 5-7s  only instead of getting 8/9 tier battles when your in  a six   but i like the idea this survey has as i know alot of people are getting ticked  from    people who will not work as a  team  but this idea has been brought to light a few times 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

that used to happen during CBT; unevenly balanced matches, matches that involved 4 or 5 different tiers, all manner of unregulated nonsense. I would much rather have it the way it is now.

 

​You misread what I was saying.  I meant that a match of 6 on a side all from the same tier would be preferable to 12 on a side with Tier 5, 6, and 7 mixed together.  That evens out the technology / inherent ship characteristics making it far more a game of player skill than being  a Tier 7 in a game where most of the ships are tier 5 or 6.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say no because it just confuses MM more and divisions will [edited]with it so hard, if me and a couple unicum guys from my clan div up our team would be potato and the other team would be okayish as a result. Especially with divs SBMM is not a good idea for pubs.

 

So basically you and your clan mates would not be able to dominate battles anymore.  Cuz that is what is going on now. Clans like OPG and BOTES etc Div up and sometimes even time drop more Div into a battle and just dominate to the point it looks like an NFL team playing a High School Football team.  How is that good for the game? How is that good for the WOWS community of players?  Under the way, I want to do it you all would still be together in a DIV but you are less likely to then also get a bunch of high skilled players to boot. You would actually have to earn your wins instead of manipulating the system to your advantage. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While my experience with WoW is more limited than with WoT, I suspect the same issues are at fault here that are in WoT.  The main one is, as you increase tiers, the lower tier players / ships in a game become increasingly worthless to the outcome.*snip*

I think from what I've seen with WoW the same applies here. *snip*

 

While I agree with you to a large degree in WoT, I disagree that it translates so closely in WoWs. 

 

I think tier 10 ships are definitely linearly better than the 8's, but I've put Tirpitz shells into Yamato citadels on more than one occasion.  Torpedos are a high damage threat regardless of what tier of destroyer is launching them.  Especially in the higher tiers, cruiser guns really become effective at: quickly deleting underage botes, punching their counterparts in the face and keeping red battleships nice and toasty.  I can't really speak to a bottom tier carrier's capabilities, but I haven't really played them past tier 5. 

 

In my opinion, it is far easier to do well and influence the outcome of a match as a bottom tier ship in WoWs than it is as a bottom tier tank in WoT.

 

OP, on your original topic - so long as the tiers and classes are balanced pretty close, I'm happy with MM.  How much would 'skill-based' really add, anyway?  I'm an average player overall - but that represents a very high degree of variability in my performance from match to match.  There's a good deal of games where I went into the drink before the 14 minute mark with no damage done, and a number of 100K, 150K, 200K damage multiple kill and cap games in there.  (Hey, '1' is a number!  LOL!)  Sure, you can slot me by my 'average' statistics, but they don't necessarily represent me well on a game-by-game basis.  And because of that, for those of us who don't consistently put up high numbers (or really low ones), the system won't be able to do a whole lot better than the current random selection anyway.  Or at least that's what I'm going to use as a coherent argument for now.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.