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

This is why we need a skill based matchmaker

47 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

65
[NGA-A]
[NGA-A]
Alpha Tester
211 posts
9,970 battles

While Wargaming products have traditionally not had skilled based matchmaking I think its time to revisit the concept since player stupidity has seemed to increase as of late, Its gotten so bad half my clan wont even play randoms anymore, and if this trend keeps up the player base is gonna evaporate.  See below for a good example of how bad its getting.

 

shot-21.06.22_16.22.24-0117.jpg

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
189 posts
18,560 battles

if you ask me... the mm isn't the problem alone.

For what it seems your team just lost all their dds and are unable to push or do something. Sadly happens more often than not but i can assure you that a mm with skill as a factor will only make horrible queue times for many players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,972
[WORX]
Members
14,126 posts
20,570 battles

Again..

 

Skill based MM will not change anything you describe in the pic...

Power creep is what started the trend at high tiers.

58 minutes ago, TheLucinator said:

player stupidity has seemed to increase

.. As long as power creep exist and expanded, no type of MM will fix the pandorah's box power creep has opened.

Edited by Navalpride33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
79 posts
53 battles

This game would have to have players of skill to have a skilled matchmaker. Unfortunately that time has passed.

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
949 posts
220 battles

This is why skill based MM can never work:

  1. Very player vs Very good player.  Win rate will average out at 50%
  2. Good player vs good player.  Win rate will average out at 50%
  3. Average player vs Average player.  Win rate will average out at 50%

 

before you know it, everyone will have 50% win rate.  How can skill-based MM work when everyone has the same win rate?

Edited by Laser_Beam
  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,581 posts
2,011 battles
1 hour ago, Laser_Beam said:

  How can skill-based MM work when everyone has the same win rate?

Winrate isn't always representative of skill. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,634
[ARS]
Beta Testers
6,698 posts
6,719 battles
1 hour ago, Navalpride33 said:

Again..

 

Skill based MM will not change anything you describe in the pic...

Power creep is what started the trend at high tiers.

.. As long as power creep exist and expanded, no type of MM will fix the pandorah's box power creep has opened.

The screen shot has nothing to do with power creep.  I can't remotely see how you think it does.  Bad play like in that screen shot has always been part of the game, all the way back to the closed beta.

Bad players exist, but isolating them off to some forgotten corner of the service probably won't be as easy as people think.  For one, a lot of people who assume they wouldn't be placed there would be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,972
[WORX]
Members
14,126 posts
20,570 battles
4 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

I can't remotely see how you think it does. 

If you can't see it... Then explaining it's (as I quot a famous Star Trek Voyager Borg..). "Futile."

 

Edited by Navalpride33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,634
[ARS]
Beta Testers
6,698 posts
6,719 battles
1 minute ago, Navalpride33 said:

If you can't see it... Then explaining it's (as I quot a famous Star Trek Voyager Borg..). "Futile."

 

 

Because you can't because it doesn't show any.  All it shows is one team made up of ships from all periods of the game clustered in a corner while the other team, also made up of ships for all periods of the game, is spread out, capturing caps and flanking the other team.  This behavior is not new.  You cannot assign blame to it to your pet boogey man with any level of reasonableness.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
949 posts
220 battles
13 minutes ago, black_hull4 said:

Winrate isn't always representative of skill. 

Correct.  As the topic is skill-based MM, what else can be used as a measure?  Games played?  The number of ships unlocked?  Map awareness? 

All purple players I see in game have very nice winrates.  Apart from that, it is hard to measure as to why/how they are 'skilled'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,972
[WORX]
Members
14,126 posts
20,570 battles
2 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

 

Because you can't because it doesn't show any.

At high tiers in this patch (and every patch since 0.7.0 to current and maybe for the next year or two)...

It all comes down to Power Creep...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,581 posts
2,011 battles
2 minutes ago, Laser_Beam said:

As the topic is skill-based MM, what else can be used as a measure?  Games played?  The number of ships unlocked?  Map awareness? 

I never said I wanted SBMM :Smile-_tongue:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,972
[WORX]
Members
14,126 posts
20,570 battles
3 minutes ago, Laser_Beam said:

All purple players I see in game have very nice winrates.

Eww... This is relative/suggestive to a 3rd party site evaluation...


I dont agree "purple" players have any "skill" involved...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,634
[ARS]
Beta Testers
6,698 posts
6,719 battles
Just now, Navalpride33 said:

At high tiers in this patch (and every patch since 0.7.0 to current and maybe for the next year or two)...

It all comes down to Power Creep...

What, at high tiers in this patch and every patch since 0.7.0, what?  You can't even articulate what it is that is being shown, let alone how "power creep" could have caused it.  Heck, the team with the most "power creep" (two Jean Barts and a Georgia)  on it is the one clustered in the corner.

What do you see there that is different?  Because it sure looks like the same stuff I saw all the way back in closed beta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
949 posts
220 battles
14 minutes ago, black_hull4 said:

I never said I wanted SBMM :Smile-_tongue:

You did however imply there were other ways to measure skill.  I was interested to hear from you, as to how you would measure skill in WOWS.

 

Cool  response - Thanks  :)

:Smile_honoring:

Edited by Laser_Beam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,972
[WORX]
Members
14,126 posts
20,570 battles
7 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

What, at high tiers in this patch and every patch since 0.7.0, what?  You can't even articulate what it is that is being shown, let alone how "power creep" could have caused it.  Heck, the team with the most "power creep" (two Jean Barts and a Georgia)  on it is the one clustered in the corner.

What do you see there that is different?  Because it sure looks like the same stuff I saw all the way back in closed beta.

Articulation not required... Its a simple explanation.. Its power creep.. Its not that complicated really, patch 0.7.0 wouldn't have this type of game-play (shown in the Op's pic) because

  • A lot of the in game experience elements then, where not power-creep'ed to current patch levels. NOR increased in future patches to make the situation worse.

 

 

Edited by Navalpride33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,581 posts
2,011 battles
Just now, Laser_Beam said:

You did however state there were other ways to measure skill.  I was interested to hear from you, as to how you would measure skill in WOWS.

What I actually meant was that there's no FEASIBLE way to measure skill. It would be Wargaming's decision to make certain conditions, but coding them would be insurmountable. Even if it somehow got done, it would strain the servers & break queue times.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,634
[ARS]
Beta Testers
6,698 posts
6,719 battles
Just now, Navalpride33 said:

Articulation not required... Its a simple explanation.. Its power creep.. Its not that complicated really, patch 0.7.0 wouldn't have this type of game-play (shown in the Op's pic) because

  • A lot of the in game experience elements then, where not power-creep'ed to current patch levels. NOR increased in future patches to make the situation worse.

 

 

You are flat out making stuff up to claim that.  I was there.  I played at the times we are discussing.  The stuff you see in the OP's shot has happened during every patch in the game's history.  It is possible that it has gotten more common, but that cannot be established from a sample size of 1, which is what we have in this thread.  Further, even if power creep is causing more huddling together for whatever reason, you cannot establish that is the reason it was happening in this particular case without also establishing that, per your claim, it never happened before 0.7.0 and, per your claim, that it is due to power creep and not, for example, due to people becoming more familiar with the game and its mechanics.

You have established none of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,634
[ARS]
Beta Testers
6,698 posts
6,719 battles
2 minutes ago, black_hull4 said:

What I actually meant was that there's no FEASIBLE way to measure skill. It would be Wargaming's decision to make certain conditions, but coding them would be insurmountable. Even if it somehow got done, it would strain the servers & break queue times.

What would actually happen is that people would immediately claim that it wasn't tracking the right metrics to gauge skill and what we really need is a REAL skill based MM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,891
[SALVO]
Members
26,563 posts
31,290 battles
1 hour ago, Laser_Beam said:

This is why skill based MM can never work:

  1. Very player vs Very good player.  Win rate will average out at 50%
  2. Good player vs good player.  Win rate will average out at 50%
  3. Average player vs Average player.  Win rate will average out at 50%

 

before you know it, everyone will have 50% win rate.  How can skill-based MM work when everyone has the same win rate?

Stop worry about win rate.  SBMM would have to use a metric like average base XP to build teams, and not WR.

Also, one shouldn't assume that everyone would have a  WR of  50%.  Yes, they'd average out around 50%, same as they do now.  But instead of the best players have WRs around 60% or more, they'd end up with WRs closer to 51-53%, I'm guessing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,891
[SALVO]
Members
26,563 posts
31,290 battles
23 minutes ago, Laser_Beam said:

As the topic is skill-based MM, what else can be used as a measure?  Games played?  The number of ships unlocked?  Map awareness? 

Average Base XP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,972
[WORX]
Members
14,126 posts
20,570 battles
1 minute ago, Helstrem said:

You are flat out making stuff up to claim that.  I was there.  I played at the times we are discussing.  The stuff you see in the OP's shot has happened during every patch in the game's history.  It is possible that it has gotten more common, but that cannot be established from a sample size of 1, which is what we have in this thread.  Further, even if power creep is causing more huddling together for whatever reason, you cannot establish that is the reason it was happening in this particular case without also establishing that, per your claim, it never happened before 0.7.0 and, per your claim, that it is due to power creep and not, for example, due to people becoming more familiar with the game and its mechanics.

You have established none of that.

As stated. If you dont see it then its a "futile" cause...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
949 posts
220 battles
1 minute ago, Crucis said:

Stop worry about win rate.  SBMM would have to use a metric like average base XP to build teams, and not WR.

Also, one shouldn't assume that everyone would have a  WR of  50%.  Yes, they'd average out around 50%, same as they do now.  But instead of the best players have WRs around 60% or more, they'd end up with WRs closer to 51-53%, I'm guessing.

 

I'm not worried at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,634
[ARS]
Beta Testers
6,698 posts
6,719 battles
Just now, Navalpride33 said:

As stated. If you dont see it then its a "futile" cause...

Because you have said nothing.  This is your pattern.  You make vague allusions with no specifics, then saying some insulting nonsense about how the person you are going back and forth with just can't understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,634
[ARS]
Beta Testers
6,698 posts
6,719 battles
2 minutes ago, Crucis said:

Stop worry about win rate.  SBMM would have to use a metric like average base XP to build teams, and not WR.

Also, one shouldn't assume that everyone would have a  WR of  50%.  Yes, they'd average out around 50%, same as they do now.  But instead of the best players have WRs around 60% or more, they'd end up with WRs closer to 51-53%, I'm guessing.

 

 

1 minute ago, Crucis said:

Average Base XP.

Average base EXP would suffer the same fate as win rate in a skill based MM.  Placed against players of matching skill it will flatten out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×