Match Maker WR vs EXP

[LoneStormchaser]

I am convinced.

Match Maker has nothing to do with Win Rate, not exactly.

But everything to do with Experience, but not exactly.

If you have a high WR, (+50%) but a low Exp, or a high Exp., but low (-50) WR, you will get put on a team with similar stats.

It doesn't matter how well you play, because, if you get put on a team, that, at the beginning, what ever the history says, Match Maker Monitor will tell you if are going to win or lose.

So, if you run Match Maker Monitor, if you are destined to lose, do as much damage as you can, because there is a very good chance, you won't be victorious, might as well get as much exp as you can. But if it says you will win, follow those that have the highest exp because they will gobble up what experience you would like to achieve. Take what you can. Your team will probably win.

End of discussion.

[Komrade_Rylo]

The only thing mm takes into account is the tier, type, and nation of your ship.

I have nearly 1900 average xp a game, subtract premium account always being on and it's more like 1300ish base xp a game. 

You're assuming mm is skill based and I can absolutely assure you that your assumption is wrong. Another flawed assumption you're making is that you're teams stats at the start of the game determine whether or not you win or lose. 

[Kapitan_Wuff]

Better stock up on tin foil for all those hats you're gonna need to make.

[VGLance]

End of discussion?

 

Does that mean you're sniping?  (term used in communication where you get a last word in and leave before anyone can dispute)

 

You've made your statements:

 

#1. MM is partially influenced by skill.

#2. Matchmaking Monitor tells you without fail who is going to win or lose.

 

Great, you've just provided 1/2 of what is required to make a valid argument (not the combative definition of argument but the debate definition meaning to "make a claim").  Now in order to hold even a tiny microscopic shred of credibility, you need to do what intelligent human beings do:  provide direct and relevant evidence to support your claim.

 

Without doing so, you are failing in the most basic, fundamental principle of intellectual communication.  This format of making a claim and supporting it with evidence is something you should have learned in any basic English or science class.  If you cannot do this, your communication is at the level of a child trying to convince his/her parents that the sugar-filled, diabetes-in-a-box cereal is a need instead of a want.

[GiN_nTonic]

1 hour ago, Fog_Battleship_NCarolina said:

The only thing mm takes into account is the tier, type, and nation of your ship.

I have nearly 1900 average xp a game, subtract premium account always being on and it's more like 1300ish base xp a game. 

You're assuming mm is skill based and I can absolutely assure you that your assumption is wrong. Another flawed assumption you're making is that you're teams stats at the start of the game determine whether or not you win or lose. 

Actually, WG filed a patent on their MM systems that required it to go into detail on what makes their MM different than others games.  If, what they applied for a patent on is what is at work in our MM, then your statement isn't correct - and the OP's statement is "more" correct - but still far from the full picture.   If WG isn't using the MM they have a patent on, then you might be right.....but why would WG be so proud of an MM if they aren't using it?

[Dictonary]

4 minutes ago, GiN_nTonic said:

Actually, WG filed a patent on their MM systems that required it to go into detail on what makes their MM different than others games.  If, what they applied for a patent on is what is at work in our MM, then your statement isn't correct - and the OP's statement is "more" correct - but still far from the full picture.   If WG isn't using the MM they have a patent on, then you might be right.....but why would WG be so proud of an MM if they aren't using it?

If they have a patent, use it for evidence. Let us see if it supports the OP's judgement on MM or not.

[GiN_nTonic]

40 minutes ago, Dictonary said:

If they have a patent, use it for evidence. Let us see if it supports the OP's judgement on MM or not.

Here you are.

https://www.google.com/patents/US8425330

 

and for those who don't want to read the entire document, here is an important clip.  There are more instances of "ability" referenced, but this should be enough.  I will point out what WG has said about MM publicly seems at odd with the below clip from the patient.

[HMCS_Devilfish]

2 hours ago, LoneStormchaser said:

I am convinced.

Match Maker has nothing to do with Win Rate, not exactly.

But everything to do with Experience, but not exactly.

If you have a high WR, (+50%) but a low Exp, or a high Exp., but low (-50) WR, you will get put on a team with similar stats.

It doesn't matter how well you play, because, if you get put on a team, that, at the beginning, what ever the history says, Match Maker Monitor will tell you if are going to win or lose.

So, if you run Match Maker Monitor, if you are destined to lose, do as much damage as you can, because there is a very good chance, you won't be victorious, might as well get as much exp as you can. But if it says you will win, follow those that have the highest exp because they will gobble up what experience you would like to achieve. Take what you can. Your team will probably win.

End of discussion.

Wows says that they do not match exp.with MM however MM does effect your winrate if your facing a 2 tier difference 

[F3MM_Zeka]

8 hours ago, GiN_nTonic said:

Actually, WG filed a patent on their MM systems that required it to go into detail on what makes their MM different than others games.  If, what they applied for a patent on is what is at work in our MM, then your statement isn't correct - and the OP's statement is "more" correct - but still far from the full picture.   If WG isn't using the MM they have a patent on, then you might be right.....but why would WG be so proud of an MM if they aren't using it?

Not sure about the average patent lifespan, but you might wanna check the dates on that

[MaliceA4Thought]

9 hours ago, GiN_nTonic said:

Actually, WG filed a patent on their MM systems that required it to go into detail on what makes their MM different than others games.  If, what they applied for a patent on is what is at work in our MM, then your statement isn't correct - and the OP's statement is "more" correct - but still far from the full picture.   If WG isn't using the MM they have a patent on, then you might be right.....but why would WG be so proud of an MM if they aren't using it?

The main word in that patent extract is MAY...  it does not say WILL...   a patent is on an idea, not on a mechanic.  Just because you have a patent does not mean that you have actually implemented it..  it means that you have had an idea for something that could be used in the future and you are the first to have that idea, so that if someone else uses it you MAY be entitled to some return from your thought process.

Just having a patent does not mean it is actually used, or even iof parts are used that not necessarily all parts are used.

The patent is NO proof that this is what WG does, just that if they do, it was their idea before anyone else, and that if someone else uses this idea, then WG have rights to that idea as first thinkers of it. (well the first thinkers that bothered to protect their idea with a patent anyway)

As the holder of a number of patents in the us and worldwide, I can confirm that none of those "ideas" of mine are in regular use anywhere, although I thought them good ideas at the time, although one was used briefly which I licensed for a couple of years and was very succesful.

The very specific example quoted above from the patent is just ONE very small paragraph in a document that is a totally theoretical idea, there is nothing that suggests, anywhere in the document, that WG actually uses it, only that they could if they wished.

It would be much better if the OP just stopped using the Matchmaker profile and stopped wearing tifoil hats in this case.

M

 

[MaliceA4Thought]

1 hour ago, FireAndHEspam said:

Not sure about the average patent lifespan, but you might wanna check the dates on that

In the USA, 20 years for a utility patent and 14 years for a design patent, with the origionator of the patent having first right of refusal to extend the patent at the end of that period if it is deemed to be extendable.  Other countries have different timespans but are all similar.

For utility patents you have to pay an annual fee to maintain it, for design payments you don't.  I have no idea whether this particular one was filed as Utility or Design but xince this patent was issued in 2013 and filed in 2012 theres many years left for it to run and it was updated and fee filed in 2016 suggesting this may be a Utility patent.

M

[LemonadeWarrior]

Having a bigger chance to lose, doesn't mean you have to lose... Life must suck if you always give up when the odds are against you.

[LoneStormchaser]

11 hours ago, Fog_Battleship_NCarolina said:

The only thing mm takes into account is the tier, type, and nation of your ship.

I have nearly 1900 average xp a game, subtract premium account always being on and it's more like 1300ish base xp a game. 

You're assuming mm is skill based and I can absolutely assure you that your assumption is wrong. Another flawed assumption you're making is that you're teams stats at the start of the game determine whether or not you win or lose. 

I'm curious, if you were put into a line-up, 50% of the time, where your team averaged 45% WR compared to the opponents averaging 55% and over 300 average exp than your team, would your stats be what they are now?

War Gaming says they don't use WR and / or Exp to determine line-ups. You know, I wish they did. Or, maybe they do. Just because my parents used to say "because I said so" didn't make them right.

10 hours ago, Dictonary said:

If they have a patent, use it for evidence. Let us see if it supports the OP's judgement on MM or not.

No where in my post did I use the word patent.

57 minutes ago, MaliceA4Thought said:

The main word in that patent extract is MAY...  it does not say WILL...   a patent is on an idea, not on a mechanic.  Just because you have a patent does not mean that you have actually implemented it..  it means that you have had an idea for something that could be used in the future and you are the first to have that idea, so that if someone else uses it you MAY be entitled to some return from your thought process.

Just having a patent does not mean it is actually used, or even iof parts are used that not necessarily all parts are used.

The patent is NO proof that this is what WG does, just that if they do, it was their idea before anyone else, and that if someone else uses this idea, then WG have rights to that idea as first thinkers of it. (well the first thinkers that bothered to protect their idea with a patent anyway)

As the holder of a number of patents in the us and worldwide, I can confirm that none of those "ideas" of mine are in regular use anywhere, although I thought them good ideas at the time, although one was used briefly which I licensed for a couple of years and was very succesful.

The very specific example quoted above from the patent is just ONE very small paragraph in a document that is a totally theoretical idea, there is nothing that suggests, anywhere in the document, that WG actually uses it, only that they could if they wished.

It would be much better if the OP just stopped using the Matchmaker profile and stopped wearing tifoil hats in this case.

M

 

Filing a patent isn't exactly cheap, and if you were to file a patent, it would be wise to hire an attorney, which easily can run into the thousands. Using the word "MAY" releases the holder of the patent from making it obligatory. (Another reason the filer wants an attorney)

50 minutes ago, joris92 said:

Having a bigger chance to lose, doesn't mean you have to lose... Life must suck if you always give up when the odds are against you.

I agree. Even the Browns and Chargers will win a few games this year. Unfortunately, the teams they have played and will play, the odds are against them, but we shouldn't compare football games with an apparent random line-up, though all too often, the line-ups given by MM are completely unbalanced.

BTW: I never said anything about giving up. In fact, I believe I was stating just the opposite.

[DeadManxDan]

If this were even slightly true there wouldn't be 30-50 game win streaks ever.

[GiN_nTonic]

2 hours ago, MaliceA4Thought said:

The main word in that patent extract is MAY...  it does not say WILL...   a patent is on an idea, not on a mechanic.  Just because you have a patent does not mean that you have actually implemented it..  it means that you have had an idea for something that could be used in the future and you are the first to have that idea, so that if someone else uses it you MAY be entitled to some return from your thought process.

Just having a patent does not mean it is actually used, or even iof parts are used that not necessarily all parts are used.

The patent is NO proof that this is what WG does, just that if they do, it was their idea before anyone else, and that if someone else uses this idea, then WG have rights to that idea as first thinkers of it. (well the first thinkers that bothered to protect their idea with a patent anyway)

 

The term "may" is used not in a general sense, but in a specific "per match made" sense.  Meaning, that can be used to place someone in a match but id say the other factors do come first (ie ship tier, how many in queue with that range etc).

You may say its not proof, but it should be considered very good evidence that MM does consider a players win rate related to matches their put into.  At this point WG would need to counter this information in some way (not saying they will).  Otherwise, I think its justifiable to say that WG has not been entirely honest about how MM works.

[MaliceA4Thought]

12 minutes ago, GiN_nTonic said:

The term "may" is used not in a general sense, but in a specific "per match made" sense.  Meaning, that can be used to place someone in a match but id say the other factors do come first (ie ship tier, how many in queue with that range etc).

You may say its not proof, but it should be considered very good evidence that MM does consider a players win rate related to matches their put into.  At this point WG would need to counter this information in some way (not saying they will).  Otherwise, I think its justifiable to say that WG has not been entirely honest about how MM works.

I think you are jumping to conclusions, especially the accusation about honesty.

Have you read the patent?  ALL of it...   the entire document is theoretical, but if it suits your agenda to believe there is matchmaking fixing, then YOU have a duty to prove it before you start with the accusations, otherwise it is only your OPINION.  You may be right or you may be wrong, but you have NO proof either way.

A Patent of idea is NOT proof that it exists anywhere.

M

[Eichbomb]

12 hours ago, GiN_nTonic said:

Here you are.

https://www.google.com/patents/US8425330

 

and for those who don't want to read the entire document, here is an important clip.  There are more instances of "ability" referenced, but this should be enough.  I will point out what WG has said about MM publicly seems at odd with the below clip from the patient.

Having a patent does not mean it's in use. Lots of companies patent things to prevent competitors from using them.

 

There is no skill selection in MM.

[Komrade_Rylo]

3 hours ago, LoneStormchaser said:

I'm curious, if you were put into a line-up, 50% of the time, where your team averaged 45% WR compared to the opponents averaging 55% and over 300 average exp than your team, would your stats be what they are now?

 

Yes, bc I worked my [edited] off to go from being a 45% average wr to a near 60% average wr.

[GiN_nTonic]

On 9/28/2017 at 9:34 AM, MaliceA4Thought said:

I think you are jumping to conclusions, especially the accusation about honesty.

Have you read the patent?  ALL of it...   the entire document is theoretical, but if it suits your agenda to believe there is matchmaking fixing, then YOU have a duty to prove it before you start with the accusations, otherwise it is only your OPINION.  You may be right or you may be wrong, but you have NO proof either way.

A Patent of idea is NOT proof that it exists anywhere.

M

You need to read my very first post since I feel you're baiting me into an argument i'm not making.  I realize there is an "if".

However, like in a murder case just because the spouse took out a huge life insurance policy days/weeks before their significant other shows up dead doesn't mean there is foul play, but someone would have some explaining to do.

[GiN_nTonic]

On 9/28/2017 at 9:41 AM, Eichbomb said:

Having a patent does not mean it's in use. Lots of companies patent things to prevent competitors from using them.

 

There is no skill selection in MM.

"there is no skill selection in MM".... i dont think we're talking about skill.  I think we are talking about if someone's win rate in a given time is fairly high MM will seek to place them as lesser tier vehicles to start to balance the system while making it more challenging for the player.

[anonym_MbpaxbbAUblh]

I have tried both the Mods MM and XVM but they don't work. Any hints on how to make them work??

[aAkula]

If that's the case i'm [edited].

 

 

[GiN_nTonic]

1 minute ago, aAkula said:

If that's the case i'm [edited].

 

 

 

Well that is a good question - do you notice you get placed in matches where you are bottom tier more often than not?

[DDJohnston]

On 9/27/2017 at 10:44 PM, VGLance said:

#2. Matchmaking Monitor tells you without fail who is going to win or lose.

Just to comment on this:  I used this for about two weeks, and kept track.  If you watch it, you can clearly see each time which team 'should' win.  In the time I used this, it predicted the winner close to 50% of the time; i.e. I take that as not meaning a damned thing.  I can flip a coin w/o the matchmaker myself! 

 

Furthermore, it seemed to me while the MM Monitor could predict the behavior of the purple and blue players fairly well, it couldn't always predict the reds, yellows, and sometimes greens.  I don't have hard numbers for any of that, but it seemed to me that if the MM Monitor was wrong, it was because either the reds were really horrible and the 'winning' team collapsed, or the yellows and greens contributed more than predicted, thus making an 'unexpected' win.  YMMV.

 

I've since stopped using it, and let my own senses work, for what that's worth.  My numbers are creeping up slowly.  <shrug>  WR isn't tracking in the right direction atm, but, it can be streaky.  It's the other stuff that is slowly moving in the right direction.  I figure the WR will move more my way when I get better at actually influencing the win vs just being able to sometimes being able to hold my own end up.

 

 

 

 

[VGLance]

Correct, XVM / MM Monitors are not guarantees. If the team's are within a 40-60% win rate chance overall you might as well call it 50/50. The more you go outside that range and hits extremes like 90/10%, these tools tend however to be very accurate. But 10% chance is still a 10% chance. What these tools don't factor in are divisions or tier (at least I don't think they weigh by tier) so human analysis still should be done to effectively forecast. 

 

The snowball effect caused by players dying within the first couple minutes has a major impact on the outcome and even a unicum or two on a stacked team can have a bad match, get detonated, etc. 

 

I see teams sometimes where me and one or two other people are the only ones with above average performance histories and the entire enemy team is average or above including unicums. Those matches are the ones that are over in less than 8 min and frankly they were over before they started. 

 

Doesn't mean you give up, you still do your best, but there's a reason statistics play such a vital role in forecasting everything in life.... It's because it works with enough consistency to be valuable. 

 

Where people misuse these monitors is when they see a 55/45% win chance match and believe it means the software is telling you the 55% team is supposed to win and when the 45% chance team wins, the person thinks the software was "wrong" and therefore it's useless or broken. People who believe that are just naive to basic fundamentals of math and probability.