Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
HellHammer9182

How are teams decided MM?

92 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
75 posts
459 battles

Ok, so I have been noticing the last couple days I lose almost every match, and I'm just sitting around, I'm in there fighting, brawling away but it seems like I get put on a team that just runs in like Leroy Jenkins and dies. then they trash talk the team the whole rest of the match and blame the last person alive for losing the match. So how exactly are teams picked? is it random? does number of wins to loses or number of battles have an effect on it?

I'm just tired of getting put with potato teams, cause that's a paddling.

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,596
[KRAK]
Members
3,718 posts
21,738 battles
9 minutes ago, HellHammer9182 said:

Ok, so I have been noticing the last couple days I lose almost every match, and I'm just sitting around, I'm in there fighting, brawling away but it seems like I get put on a team that just runs in like Leroy Jenkins and dies. then they trash talk the team the whole rest of the match and blame the last person alive for losing the match. So how exactly are teams picked? is it random? does number of wins to loses or number of battles have an effect on it?

I'm just tired of getting put with potato teams, cause that's a paddling.

They claim it is totally random. MM just chooses by ship types and nothing else.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
130
[T-CF]
Members
551 posts
3,113 battles

It’s formed by ship and win rate. They will never admit it but you have to break your own sanity just to keep a positive win rate.

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1
  • Confused 3
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
75 posts
459 battles
4 minutes ago, LiaoXanLan said:

It’s formed by ship and win rate. They will never admit it but you have to break your own sanity just to keep a positive win rate.

I get that, it's a typical russian thing, war-thu-nder does the same thing. but still that doesn't tell me why I've been losing 90% of my matches, I'm gonna have to start a log or something on every single play in every single match and see how much experience each team has and if it's one side or not. probably have my account banned and deleted if I find something and post about it. lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,596
[KRAK]
Members
3,718 posts
21,738 battles
2 minutes ago, HellHammer9182 said:

I get that, it's a typical russian thing, war-thu-nder does the same thing. but still that doesn't tell me why I've been losing 90% of my matches, I'm gonna have to start a log or something on every single play in every single match and see how much experience each team has and if it's one side or not. probably have my account banned and deleted if I find something and post about it. lol.

Because it is random you can have win and loss streaks.

I have had win streaks of nearly 20 games in a row and loss streaks the same length.

You would have to keep a log of thousands of games to get any meaningful reliable information and you have only 295 battles showing so have fun with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,121
[A-D-F]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,931 posts
11 minutes ago, HellHammer9182 said:

I get that, it's a typical russian thing, war-thu-nder does the same thing. but still that doesn't tell me why I've been losing 90% of my matches, I'm gonna have to start a log or something on every single play in every single match and see how much experience each team has and if it's one side or not. probably have my account banned and deleted if I find something and post about it. lol.

The players that have the 70% win rates, play with the same exact match maker and pool of players, that you and I do.

The game doesn't randomly choose that "this guy is going to be good" and "this random player is going to be bad".  They have those good stats, because they make the difference on their team, more often than not. 

Stats take a good while to settle in though.  Statistics depend on having enough data to be meaningful.  A short run of good or bad luck, is just that.

The difference is that an exceptionally good player, is better at turning some bad luck into a win, than a less skilled player is.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,791
[PVE]
Members
1,696 posts
15,787 battles

Oh no another MM thread. Allow me to cover the basics: 

1. First page of comments are the usual suspects agreeing with each other that MM is random and attacking anyone that suspects otherwise. If enough opposition arises then reinforcements in the form of a certain CC will be brought in. 

2. Terms such as steamroller/snowball effect will be repeated in order to derail any serious discussion from taking place. You can make any counter point imaginable and the reply will be the snowball effect causes one sided matches. Bring up the WG MM patent or proof of MM monitor skill discrepancy, the reply will be the same statement repeated over and over. 

3. Not enough data sets. This one has already been played on this thread, it's another form of derail tactic. "You can't prove it because not enough data..." the game is literally a spreadsheet but there's not enough data. I don't care who y'ar, that's funny rite there!

4. Where is their evidence to the contrary, proving that everything is as they say? One must wonder... 

5. Any doubters of MM will be deemed "tinfoil hat conspiracy theorists." This is one of the rules in Saul Alinsky's rules for radicals: demonize and minimize a target in order to make them irrelevant. Here's a link to the list: http://www.openculture.com/2017/02/13-rules-for-radicals.html

6. I would also like to bring attention to the paradox that these "players" twist themselves into: These certain forum users are 100 percent sure that MM is random and at the same time also claim that we logically thinking forumites don't know enough to prove it isn't. :Smile_veryhappy: 

 

My personal favorite talking point,  "it's called random because it's random!" Will be used eventually. I guarantee it.

Leave your objective thinking caps at the door and enjoy the show folks!  :cap_like:

Edited by Rabbitt81
  • Cool 4
  • Confused 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,121
[A-D-F]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,931 posts
8 minutes ago, Rabbitt81 said:

3. Not enough data sets.  This one has already been played on this thread, it's again, another detail tactic. 

It's simply true.  If you give people the option of choosing soft drink #1 or soft drink #2 in a blind taste test.  Asking 3 people doesn't really tell you anything.  Making a decision about a product, based on those 3 people, would be a bad idea.

Asking 3000 people, will give you much more valuable information. 

A sufficient sample size is required for a statistic to be meaningful.
 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
984
[KAPPA]
Members
3,117 posts
8,574 battles
3 minutes ago, Rabbitt81 said:

Oh no another MM thread. Allow me to cover the basics: 

1. First page of comments are the usual suspects agreeing with each other that MM is random and attacking anyone that suspects otherwise. If enough opposition arises then reinforcements in the form of a certain CC will be brought in. 

2. Terms such as steamroller/snowball effect will be repeated in order to derail any serious discussion from taking place. 

3. Not enough data sets.  This one has already been played on this thread, it's again, another detail tactic. 

Honestly, the people that think there is a secret WR-based MM make me think they give WG too much credit. Are they playing the same game? Seriously, these are the devs that everyone complains about them being incompetent because of x or y reason of the week. It'd be nice if people would at least decide if WG is full of geniuses or what.

Personally, I have to wonder if they could even create this super secret MM people talk about that apparently tries to screw you over, and often 'only' you. As if WG wants you, specifically, to fail. But to what ends? Why would they do this? What do they even gain?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,121
[A-D-F]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,931 posts
10 minutes ago, Shoggoth_pinup said:

Honestly, the people that think there is a secret WR-based MM make me think they give WG too much credit. Are they playing the same game? Seriously, these are the devs that everyone complains about them being incompetent because of x or y reason of the week. It'd be nice if people would at least decide if WG is full of geniuses or what.

Personally, I have to wonder if they could even create this super secret MM people talk about that apparently tries to screw you over, and often 'only' you. As if WG wants you, specifically, to fail. But to what ends? Why would they do this? What do they even gain?

If someone was convinced that the MM wasn't random but instead was biased against them.  That no matter what they do, the game is going to force them to fail more often than not and that that it is outside of their control, I have no idea why in the world they would continue to play the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
984
[KAPPA]
Members
3,117 posts
8,574 battles
Just now, Burnsy said:

If someone was convinced that the MM wasn't random but instead was biased against them.  That no matter what they do, the game is going to force them to fail, that it is outside of their control, I have no idea why in the world they would continue to play that game.

Right? It's like they stick around just to try and warn the rest of us or something... but... if MM is out to get them, wouldn't this then mean that it can't be out to get any of us? They are like our Super Man, as such. Our matchmaking martyr.

...Or, rather, that's the best reason I can imagine for their justification.

Of course, their tinfoil hat could actually be a tinfoil crown, and they think everything is out to get to them. ...In which case, I wonder why they use the forums.

Thinking about this is giving me a headache.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
431
[STURM]
Members
721 posts
5,903 battles
1 hour ago, Shoggoth_pinup said:

Right? It's like they stick around just to try and warn the rest of us or something... but... if MM is out to get them, wouldn't this then mean that it can't be out to get any of us? They are like our Super Man, as such. Our matchmaking martyr.

...Or, rather, that's the best reason I can imagine for their justification.

Of course, their tinfoil hat could actually be a tinfoil crown, and they think everything is out to get to them. ...In which case, I wonder why they use the forums.

Thinking about this is giving me a headache.

Personally, I think it's just them not wanting to admit they are just not as good as they tell themselves. They just find it easier to claim a conspiracy against them instead of looking at what they do wrong.

And, of course, they only claim the conspiracy, instead of actually providing proof. And if you do press them on it, they tend to try to shift the burden of proof to avoid having to do anything.

Honestly, it's sad how many people pull from this same playbook instead of just admitting that they are not perfect at the game and have room to improve, just like every other player.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,551
[O7]
Members
1,494 posts
11,202 battles

i can confirm we at the O7 clan pay $500 a month for premium matchmaking to wargaming

this includes guaranteed better teams by forcing 60%+ win rate players on my team and under 50% win rate players on the enemy team.

this delusion that matchmaker is random is hilarious, i mean i nearly have a 60% solo win rate, SOLO LOL its not humanly possible to achieve these numbers by simply getting gooder.

just get your clan to scrap together $500 and enjoy winning.

  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Community Department
3,322 posts
1,300 battles
2 hours ago, LiaoXanLan said:

It’s formed by ship and win rate. They will never admit it but you have to break your own sanity just to keep a positive win rate.

Let's stop spreading this non-constructivenes further. Win rate is not included in the MM Rules, never was, actually. Here is the Rules (https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Battle_Mechanics_(WoWS)) which work and there is nothing tricky behind them.  

1 hour ago, HellHammer9182 said:

I get that, it's a typical russian thing, [edited] does the same thing. but still that doesn't tell me why I've been losing 90% of my matches, I'm gonna have to start a log or something on every single play in every single match and see how much experience each team has and if it's one side or not. probably have my account banned and deleted if I find something and post about it. lol.

You may, and you won't be the first, and highly likely the last also. You won't be banned if you don't break rules.

We don't use any tricky mechanicks because there are many players who estimate the numbers carefully. And if it were so, it would have been discovered already. And of course it would bring extremely negative consequence for all of our projects.

We greatly appreciate this activity of players who like to investiagate details also, because sometimes, as I can remember it helped us to fix some bugs.
But I'll tell you once again, benefit of using any kind of hidden mechanics never justifies the risk. So we simply don't use them. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Community Department
3,322 posts
1,300 battles
2 hours ago, HellHammer9182 said:

Ok, so I have been noticing the last couple days I lose almost every match, and I'm just sitting around, I'm in there fighting, brawling away but it seems like I get put on a team that just runs in like Leroy Jenkins and dies. then they trash talk the team the whole rest of the match and blame the last person alive for losing the match. So how exactly are teams picked? is it random? does number of wins to loses or number of battles have an effect on it?

 I'm just tired of getting put with potato teams, cause that's a paddling.

I see. I also sometimes have a losing streak. Sometimes WR is under 45% and no efforts help. I guess most of players have this from time to time. It depends on a number of reasons. Sometimes you may be simply tired, and it may be better to have some rest and to watch anything.
I can see you are trying to play on Bismark, it's not a bad ship, but it's also not easy to use espesially when you have tier X battles.
I would recommend to search for some good WoWS replays and reviews to have some additional good examples of tacktics and specs for modernisations and commander skills that may work on the most maps. It will help to icrease your WR better than any random good players can do in your random teams.
Also, one more way is to ask for a div with a player who knows the tactics on the ship and may give you a couple of advice in the battle.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TORCH]
Members
620 posts
16,238 battles
3 hours ago, LiaoXanLan said:

It’s formed by ship and win rate. They will never admit it but you have to break your own sanity just to keep a positive win rate.

Ok, let's pretend for a minute that MM DOES form teams based on win rate.  What, exactly, does it do with the win rate data?  Does it use win rate to:

a.  form teams with approximately the same average win rate on each side, or

b.  form teams with all the players with the best win rates on one side, or

c.  form a team with all players with the highest win rates on one side, and those with the worst win rates on MY side?

I've never seen anyone who claims MM is based on win rate explain HOW it uses win rate.

I also note with interest the number of threads on the forum pleading with WG to create a win rate- or skill-based monitor, at the same time others are claiming that MM somehow secretly uses win rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
195
[ANKER]
Members
366 posts
6,327 battles

i just play and have fun...Yes i still try hard and sometimes i do make comments and being salty about losing a lot...

Reason i stop looking at my stats..and it Feels great hahhaha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33,574
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
24,687 posts
19,824 battles

I find it interesting that MM blame threads are always from someone on a losing streak trying to place blame, and never from someone on a winning streak.

Maybe I should buck the trend and blame MM whenever I win 8 in a row...

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,508
[RKLES]
Members
12,557 posts
14,317 battles
3 hours ago, Vaffu said:

They claim it is totally random. MM just chooses by ship types and nothing else.

Yes they Claim it’s totally random, and yet I remember seeing something a while back where if you have just bought a new tank or ship that your first handful of battles will some how end up with more favorable MM to get you started off with your new vehicle. And in my experience that has been true. Granted you still need to play at least somewhat intelligently but still odds are certainly more favorable. Which does blow a lot of things out of the water in the arguments against WG “never rigging matches”.

So if there are good players and a ton of bad players online, WG at least need to evenly distribute the good players between teams as you can imagine how a ratio of 1 good player vs 4 good players turns out. I would not even mind WOT Blitz style where if your a good player you get saddled with the bad players consistently on either Saturday or Sunday and the other day you get to have the good day. My bad day in that game is Sunday and pretty much consistently stays that way, while a few friends have their bad day on Saturday. So MM has randomly assigned which day of the weekend will be a good player’s bad MM day, but grants them a better day as well to make up for it.

Big problem in WOWs I have noticed is just like the German Enigma machines, the Naval Enigma had a couple extra code rotors. And Wargaming seems to have followed suit in WOWs by adding in a few extra MM patterns which are really annoying and include week long or even month long streak yes of good or bad MM into the normal cycles. Which I suppose could be Wargaming’s way of throwing those of us that have played tanks off our MM prediction charts. 

 

Other thing is I have never been exactly sure how WG manages it, but they obviously keep track of vaguely how well players can perform without relying solely on the face value WR which can be falsely inflated with seal clubbing, and not always enough battles in a ship or tank yet to have some players be relied upon one way or another to have the vehicle WR be the data used. Then they also likely have algorithms for maps and vehicles. When I have resisted the system wanting me to take my “required losses” in tanks, it would eventually set me up with some battles in the worst possible maps, worst players MM could find, and of course the weakest tanks for those players. Enemy would have the better average players, all the better armored and armed tanks. It was on those days I would division with friends that did not believe that WG ever rigged battles, few battles later they firmly believed without any doubts WG could rig battles...

 

But in any case it all evens out, you get some winning streaks, some losing streaks, and a good amount of what I call “Neutral” MM where it’s up to your skills as a player to affect your stats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,508
[RKLES]
Members
12,557 posts
14,317 battles
17 minutes ago, Lert said:

I find it interesting that MM blame threads are always from someone on a losing streak trying to place blame, and never from someone on a winning streak.

Maybe I should buck the trend and blame MM whenever I win 8 in a row...

Actually yes you can blame the MM Lert. The same system that ensures you don’t get 100% WR after a few battles in your tanks or ships also assures that your WR will not remain a flat 0% either, although I have seen players obviously trying to see how low their WR can get and failing to go below certain WR percentages. And lets be clear such MM manipulations are not exclusive to WG, but to many gaming companies to help ensure that their players do not get bored from seeing too many losses or wins.

Edited by Admiral_Thrawn_1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,408 posts
10,454 battles

Ship tier and type/class - nothing more.  There is no way MM can know how anyone person will play at any time much less 24 people. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,624 posts
10 minutes ago, CylonRed said:

Ship tier and type/class - nothing more.  There is no way MM can know how anyone person will play at any time much less 24 people. 

do not forget that MM includes how many battles on the same ship you were down or up tiered...was it 20? This was announced several patches ago. Are there also including WR in the MM code? No idea, I've never seen the MM code anywhere, and I do not care. If the MM code includes anything that prevent your ship to win too often or nor too much is not that relevant...and could just be totally random...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,389
[INTEL]
Members
13,459 posts
37,276 battles

How is MM determined? I always get the 40% CV, the Arizona that drives out to the 1 line, and the cruisers who drive into the cap in first minutes and get annihilated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,871
[WOLFG]
Members
30,587 posts
9,232 battles
5 hours ago, HellHammer9182 said:

Ok, so I have been noticing the last couple days I lose almost every match, and I'm just sitting around, I'm in there fighting, brawling away but it seems like I get put on a team that just runs in like Leroy Jenkins and dies. then they trash talk the team the whole rest of the match and blame the last person alive for losing the match. 

I'm just tired of getting put with potato teams, cause that's a paddling.

No offense, but if you're regularly one of the last left, with your damage numbers, they have a point. 

You're one of the people that others complain about when they start these topics....

But the bright side is, you look pretty new, so you have time to drop the Dunning-Kruger, and figure out how to not be one of the ones you complain about.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
433
[-VT-]
Members
948 posts
27,029 battles
5 hours ago, Burnsy said:

The players that have the 70% win rates, play with the same exact match maker and pool of players, that you and I do.

The game doesn't randomly choose that "this guy is going to be good" and "this random player is going to be bad".  They have those good stats, because they make the difference on their team, more often than not. 

Stats take a good while to settle in though.  Statistics depend on having enough data to be meaningful.  A short run of good or bad luck, is just that.

The difference is that an exceptionally good player, is better at turning some bad luck into a win, than a less skilled player is.

Yeah that's a partial statement, 70% mean they probably div up the majority of the time and have serval OP ships in their port as well.  Kamikaze R for example. Or heaven forbid play for a year figure it out and then get a new account so that their learning phase doesn't effect their percentage. Not disputing that some players are really good but there are other factors you neglected to mention.  I was in a game, with a tester no less,  that had a 19pt Capt. in a tier 3 match; I asked him why seal club when trying out a ship. His response was it needed to have everything to evaluate, that's some [edited] and a [edited] method of testing. Now possibly there was other testing that he didn't mention to get conclusion.

 

MM is a little screwy just admit it; its ok we know its a difficult nut to crack.

But don't blow smoke up our butts either some simple changes would help quite a bit.  For example if 2 Missouri's are in que put one on each team for Christ sake, same with any other ship.  Radar is a huge impact on the game having one team have 4 radar ships and the other having 1 or none is just stupid;  that's akin to having on side have a CV and the other not. Use MM to even that out some not that hard. 

 

 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×