Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Ocoda

MATCHMAKING QUESTION?

56 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

13
[BRO1]
Members
86 posts
5,831 battles

Okay i understand it takes a team to win but just how does the matchmaking work? does it take into account the skill of the player as well as ships tier ? 

My reason for asking is I've lost 11 of the last 15 games and its very frustrating when there is no give on it having lost at least 8 in a row. 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
170
[OSG]
Beta Testers
1,350 posts
14,793 battles

I believe it only takes into account the class and tier of ships.....WG has stated it does not take into account skill.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
190 posts
3,146 battles

If you can come up with a system to measure the skill of the human behind the screen (that is not so easily manipulated as to be completely pointless), I'm sure several gaming companies would be willing to fund you for life.

I believe the MM only takes into account ship type and tier.  I believe they could go a lot further, but its a fine line between balanced and rioting about WG setting matches ot make everyone lean toward 50%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
469
[QNA]
[QNA]
Members
1,838 posts
5,881 battles

Ship type, tier, amount of player playing at the time. Otherwise enjoy the challenge!

Spoiler

Or complain like everyone else

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
581
[OPRAH]
[OPRAH]
Beta Testers
3,765 posts
12,470 battles

At tier 1 and 2 I believe MM attempts to put new less experienced players on the teams to help keep very experienced players from dominating a match. That is based on a players number of battles but not skill. So no MM does not use skill nor Ranked battle ranking just tier and ship type.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,061
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,233 posts
8,804 battles
26 minutes ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

At tier 1 and 2 I believe MM attempts to put new less experienced players on the teams to help keep very experienced players from dominating a match. That is based on a players number of battles but not skill. So no MM does not use skill nor Ranked battle ranking just tier and ship type.

True but that is based purely on match count which is easy to game with new accounts.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
581
[OPRAH]
[OPRAH]
Beta Testers
3,765 posts
12,470 battles

@BrushWolf True but having multiple accounts is a rules violations. Besides I have enough on my hands with this one account to even consider another just to pound on new players. A ridiculous concept but as a friend use to say Whatever blows your skirt up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,061
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,233 posts
8,804 battles
2 minutes ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

@BrushWolf True but having multiple accounts is a rules violations. Besides I have enough on my hands with this one account to even consider another just to pound on new players. A ridiculous concept but as a friend use to say Whatever blows your skirt up!

Actually multiple accounts are fine until you use them to cause trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
469
[QNA]
[QNA]
Members
1,838 posts
5,881 battles
Just now, BrushWolf said:

Actually multiple accounts are fine until you use them to cause trouble.

$$$

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
158
[OBS]
Members
1,243 posts
9,006 battles
2 hours ago, Old_Baldy_One said:

If you can come up with a system to measure the skill of the human behind the screen (that is not so easily manipulated as to be completely pointless), I'm sure several gaming companies would be willing to fund you for life.

I believe the MM only takes into account ship type and tier.  I believe they could go a lot further, but its a fine line between balanced and rioting about WG setting matches ot make everyone lean toward 50%.

WTR would be a decent start as a measurement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,061
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,233 posts
8,804 battles
12 minutes ago, BullHalsey said:

WTR would be a decent start as a measurement.

Not really, it is heavily biased to damage done and easily gamed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
158
[OBS]
Members
1,243 posts
9,006 battles
5 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Not really, it is heavily biased to damage done and easily gamed.

Being able to deal consistent damage vs not being able to sounds like a fair place to start looking.  No matter though, they already have their formula.  Of course they do it's a serious business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,061
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,233 posts
8,804 battles
22 minutes ago, BullHalsey said:

Being able to deal consistent damage vs not being able to sounds like a fair place to start looking.  No matter though, they already have their formula.  Of course they do it's a serious business.

It is easily gamed and once people figured out where the cutoffs were enough would abuse that for more favorable MM. As flawed as the MM is skill based is even more flawed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
158
[OBS]
Members
1,243 posts
9,006 battles
1 minute ago, BrushWolf said:

It is easily gamed and once people figured out where the cutoffs were enough would abuse that for more favorable MM. As flawed as the MM is skill based is even more flawed.

So players would keep their average damage only so high in order to be kept in easier brackets?  If they do, hell with them, those are the types we don't want in good matches anyway.  I wouldn't slow myself down just to have an "easier" enemy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,061
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,233 posts
8,804 battles
1 minute ago, BullHalsey said:

So players would keep their average damage only so high in order to be kept in easier brackets?  If they do, hell with them, those are the types we don't want in good matches anyway.  I wouldn't slow myself down just to have an "easier" enemy.

The other way, if they were close to the next lower bracket they would tank their damage. You wouldn't and I know I wouldn't but just as happened with the team damage system there are people that would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,415 posts
6,082 battles
52 minutes ago, BullHalsey said:

WTR would be a decent start as a measurement.

Not a good measurement but also - it is not running anymore so....  It stopped updating sometime late last week and dropped all of my 30+ Richelieu games.  When I get to the page now it can't get a connection Wargaming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
158
[OBS]
Members
1,243 posts
9,006 battles
1 minute ago, CylonRed said:

Not a good measurement but also - it is not running anymore so....  It stopped updating sometime late last week and dropped all of my 30+ Richelieu games.  When I get to the page now it can't get a connection Wargaming.

Interesting right after I noticed the rapid ascent of all deepwater torp destroyers.  Last time I looked it was only their data that I could no longer find.  But yes they have surpassed all that came before them in WR and avg damage.  Only thing still clinging to any lead was the Black, for obvious reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
174
[CAST]
Members
1,171 posts
7,201 battles

wtr uses damage as 50% of the value.  It is easily gamed because players can increase their wtr by farming damage from high value targets like BBs.  Players can damage DDs and cruisers, and top the % of damage done to ships, but it will still be behind the raw damage values done by farming BB damage.  The % damage is a better metric to use, but unfortunately wtr doesn't, or can't, do that.  You can game a better bracket if MM is using wtr if you switch from BBs to DDs as your primary target.  That is why it isn't a good thing to use for MM.  You also have to take into consideration the player stats in the ship they are in, not as a player in general.

There are ways to properly match players and the ships they are piloting.  We just don't think the present MM does anything close to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
158
[OBS]
Members
1,243 posts
9,006 battles
9 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

The other way, if they were close to the next lower bracket they would tank their damage. You wouldn't and I know I wouldn't but just as happened with the team damage system there are people that would.

Don't quite follow, but either way you are saying players would keep their damage within tolerances that place them in the bracket they want to be in?  Or that they will tank their damage, seal club a bit, then tank again?  Of course, since exact MM composition isn't officially stated, if this such change were enacted quietly how (many) people would know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
158
[OBS]
Members
1,243 posts
9,006 battles
3 minutes ago, Murcc said:

wtr uses damage as 50% of the value.  It is easily gamed because players can increase their wtr by farming damage from high value targets like BBs.  Players can damage DDs and cruisers, and top the % of damage done to ships, but it will still be behind the raw damage values done by farming BB damage.  The % damage is a better metric to use, but unfortunately wtr doesn't, or can't, do that.  You can game a better bracket if MM is using wtr if you switch from BBs to DDs as your primary target.  That is why it isn't a good thing to use for MM.  You also have to take into consideration the player stats in the ship they are in, not as a player in general.

There are ways to properly match players and the ships they are piloting.  We just don't think the present MM does anything close to that.

Oh I agree, the WTR comment was in response to the statement that it wasn't feasible at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
174
[CAST]
Members
1,171 posts
7,201 battles
4 minutes ago, BullHalsey said:

Oh I agree, the WTR comment was in response to the statement that it wasn't feasible at all.

I wasn't directing the comments at any responses in general, just to the overall topic.:Smile_Default:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,061
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,233 posts
8,804 battles
6 minutes ago, BullHalsey said:

Don't quite follow, but either way you are saying players would keep their damage within tolerances that place them in the bracket they want to be in?  Or that they will tank their damage, seal club a bit, then tank again?  Of course, since exact MM composition isn't officially stated, if this such change were enacted quietly how (many) people would know?

Both, people would avoid doing better to stay where they are and others would do worse to get into the lower bracket. It is scary how much work people will do to not have to work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
158
[OBS]
Members
1,243 posts
9,006 battles
3 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Both, people would avoid doing better to stay where they are and others would do worse to get into the lower bracket. It is scary how much work people will do to not have to work.

Sounds rather like the welfare system lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
158
[OBS]
Members
1,243 posts
9,006 battles
3 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Both, people would avoid doing better to stay where they are and others would do worse to get into the lower bracket. It is scary how much work people will do to not have to work.

What would that mean for players like us though that advanced as far as it wanted us to?  Would it really be worse for us than it is now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,061
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,233 posts
8,804 battles
2 minutes ago, BullHalsey said:

What would that mean for players like us though that advanced as far as it wanted us to?  Would it really be worse for us than it is now?

The other issue with skill based MM is that no mater what point it is applied it drives everyone's WR towards 50%. The really good players will have lower rates than they do now and the really poor players will have higher rates even though they won't be any worse or any better. This drives players out when it seems no matter how much they improve they don't get anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×