Example why MM can't be fixed...

[UnOrthoDocks]

When WG tells us they can't fix MM this is an example why we should believe them. Yes this is in BRAWLS, but it's basically the same amount of ships as RANDOM (which is stupid already), so yeah.

The funny thing about this screenshot is I didn't get the one that said 30:12. Which is how long it actually took to get into a battle.

 

 

[Navalpride33]

19 hours ago, UnOrthoDocks said:

When WG tells us they can't fix MM this is an example why we should believe them.

For those who advocate for something they believe in... Documentation of the opposite viewpoint, is only viewed in the same level as a unicorn, Leprechaun, or Bigfoot.

 

[UnOrthoDocks]

7 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

For those who advocate for something they believe in... Documentation of their opposite views, is only viewed in the same level as a unicorn, Leprechaun, or Bigfoot.

 

I get your point, but mine is more obvious that while it says brawls are set up for skill levels they still havent figured it out yet....if they even tried.

[Lord_Slayer]

1 hour ago, UnOrthoDocks said:

I get your point, but mine is more obvious that while it says brawls are set up for skill levels they still havent figured it out yet....if they even tried.

Skill level yes, but it also says Ship restriction are applied.

[Asym_KS]

OK, I'm way behind on the definition of Skill the MM uses.....?  Anyone know what they are using?  I wonder how it differentiates PVE form PVP skill?

[Ahskance]

Just now, Asym_KS said:

OK, I'm way behind on the definition of Skill the MM uses.....?  Anyone know what they are using?  I wonder how it differentiates PVE form PVP skill?

The Brawls Matchmaker takes into account "Number of Wins" in the current Brawl.  As folks play and win, they will be matched with others that have played and won. 

The more wins, the more you'll experience other players with more wins.

[Asym_KS]

2 hours ago, Ahskance said:

The Brawls Matchmaker takes into account "Number of Wins" in the current Brawl.  As folks play and win, they will be matched with others that have played and won. 

The more wins, the more you'll experience other players with more wins.

Thanks.  Got the camo from the other night.   Just wins in brawl.....   That's a pretty loose definition of skill...........cause, even I can win sometimes.   That blind pig and the nut thing....

[kgh52]

3 hours ago, Ahskance said:

The Brawls Matchmaker takes into account "Number of Wins" in the current Brawl.  As folks play and win, they will be matched with others that have played and won. 

The more wins, the more you'll experience other players with more wins.

In the 1st week or 2 of the baseball season players with a lifetime batting average of .250 or lower may be hitting .400 or better. I think that is a fair comparison of the MM mechanic used in brawls.

With that said, I don't believe there is a workable SBMM for a game protecting lesser skilled players with RNG.

[DukeTestudo]

1 hour ago, kgh52 said:

In the 1st week or 2 of the baseball season players with a lifetime batting average of .250 or lower may be hitting .400 or better. I think that is a fair comparison of the MM mechanic used in brawls.

With that said, I don't believe there is a workable SBMM for a game protecting lesser skilled players with RNG.

If anybody (not just Wargaming) could figure out a completely reliable / fast / accurate system, the general algorithm would have been copied by every game developer in existence by now.   All online games with any sort of PvP make tradeoffs.   

And, even if such a system existed, some players would still be unhappy because a "fair" game from the matchmaker perspective doesn't mean it's going to be a fun game.   And even if you prove that it was a fair match, they would still complain at the result.

 

[kgh52]

2 hours ago, DukeTestudo said:

If anybody (not just Wargaming) could figure out a completely reliable / fast / accurate system, the general algorithm would have been copied by every game developer in existence by now.   All online games with any sort of PvP make tradeoffs.   

And, even if such a system existed, some players would still be unhappy because a "fair" game from the matchmaker perspective doesn't mean it's going to be a fun game.   And even if you prove that it was a fair match, they would still complain at the result.

 

I agree. I am also under the opinion more blowout battles would take place with balanced teams. With the 1st ship sunk, the balance created by MM would be gone giving one team the advantage. With the present MM system, a team can loose a few ships early on without effecting their ability to win. 

 

[Impitoyable_5929_x]

12 hours ago, UnOrthoDocks said:

funny thing about this screenshot is I didn't get the one that said 30:12

You can enter the game within 1 minute if you choose a cruiser or CV. BBs are always a popular option in Brawl and WG limits them to 2, which brings about a long wating time if you select a BB as you see more than 30 BBs in the queue. 

[vikingno2]

3 hours ago, kgh52 said:

I agree. I am also under the opinion more blowout battles would take place with balanced teams. With the 1st ship sunk, the balance created by MM would be gone giving one team the advantage. With the present MM system, a team can loose a few ships early on without effecting their ability to win. 

 

LOL I more balanced team loses a ship and it would create more blowouts than if a unbalanced team loses a ship? Really is that the point you going with lol; its definitely an opinion not logical but yes an opinion 

[SKurj]

2 hours ago, vikingno2 said:

LOL I more balanced team loses a ship and it would create more blowouts than if a unbalanced team loses a ship? Really is that the point you going with lol; its definitely an opinion not logical but yes an opinion 

yes...   just because the teams might be unbalanced based on wr for example, doesn't mean it will be the "worst" team that loses a ship first...

in a balanced model, it would always tilt in favour of the team that didn't lose a ship.

[Admiral_Andy]

2 hours ago, vikingno2 said:

LOL I more balanced team loses a ship and it would create more blowouts than if a unbalanced team loses a ship? Really is that the point you going with lol; its definitely an opinion not logical but yes an opinion 

This is a DPM game.  The team that does the most damage in the shortest amount of time wins.  I would think it is very logical that all things equal a team with 12 ships will do more damage than a team with 11 ships left.  Therefore the team with 12 will have an easier time taking out another ship.  Because there is no ship respawning every time a team loses a ship it puts them at a disadvantage and more likely to lose more ships before the other team will lose a ship.

[vikingno2]

35 minutes ago, Admiral_Andy said:

This is a DPM game.  The team that does the most damage in the shortest amount of time wins.  I would think it is very logical that all things equal a team with 12 ships will do more damage than a team with 11 ships left.  Therefore the team with 12 will have an easier time taking out another ship.  Because there is no ship respawning every time a team loses a ship it puts them at a disadvantage and more likely to lose more ships before the other team will lose a ship.

AND that has nothing to do with the point I was refuting ...........furthermore this is not a DPM game. It a tactical Navel battle game, where spotting is the key to most battles 

[AXELGREASE]

14 hours ago, Ahskance said:

The Brawls Matchmaker takes into account "Number of Wins" in the current Brawl.  As folks play and win, they will be matched with others that have played and won. 

The more wins, the more you'll experience other players with more wins.

UM, am I the only one who understands a win based MM is NOT the same as a skill based MM?   Wins do not always indicate skill, you know this as do I.

While it is true, really good players win more and it is because of their skill.  Really bad players can be carried to wins and look almost as good.  Skill is reflected more accurately in other metrics.  Brawls does not use a skill based MM and with the OP we have no idea of his brawls win rate.  It may high and that is the cause of his wait time. 

[Retarie]

15 minutes ago, AXELGREASE said:

UM, am I the only one who understands a win based MM is NOT the same as a skill based MM?   Wins do not always indicate skill, you know this as do I.

While it is true, really good players win more and it is because of their skill.  Really bad players can be carried to wins and look almost as good.  Skill is reflected more accurately in other metrics.  Brawls does not use a skill based MM and with the OP we have no idea of his brawls win rate.  It may high and that is the cause of his wait time. 

I was under the impression that W/R was the only way to tell a good player from bad, what other metric can be used?

[kgh52]

3 hours ago, vikingno2 said:

LOL I more balanced team loses a ship and it would create more blowouts than if a unbalanced team loses a ship? Really is that the point you going with lol; its definitely an opinion not logical but yes an opinion 

So you are saying it is illogical to assume 23  equally skilled players split into one 11 team & one 12 man team (this is what you will have once the 1st ship is sunk), the 11 man team is not at a disadvantage and has the same chance to win. As you say that is definitely an opinion.

 

 

[Swervenkill]

1 minute ago, Retarie said:

I was under the impression that W/R was the only way to tell a good player from bad, what other metric can be used?

I prefer the kill to die ratio. 

[Retarie]

9 minutes ago, Swervenkill said:

I prefer the kill to die ratio. 

Based on the ship itself and not the overall? yeah i can see that.

what about combining the average damage for that ship with the kill to death ratio?

That way people that love to cherry pick would possibly get shown up.

[smokey66]

skilled based matching can only be done if u can measure skill...no current number is accurate enough, to many variables.

 

 

 

[SgtBeltfed]

8 hours ago, kgh52 said:

I agree. I am also under the opinion more blowout battles would take place with balanced teams. With the 1st ship sunk, the balance created by MM would be gone giving one team the advantage. With the present MM system, a team can loose a few ships early on without effecting their ability to win. 

 

I suspect that it wouldn't make any difference whatsoever. Skill based or non-skill based, the match will still be defined by the players that got placed into the match. Who's on the top of their game at that moment, who's not, who's having a meltdown because he's in a CV/Sub/too many DD/I hate that broken ship match, or anything else that might make a player play better or worse, take your pick.

Long term, over tens of thousands of games, maybe. But the guy crying that MM is broke because he suffered 10 blowouts in a row, and his team completely sucked every time,  he'll never notice.

[vikingno2]

2 hours ago, kgh52 said:

So you are saying it is illogical to assume 23  equally skilled players split into one 11 team & one 12 man team (this is what you will have once the 1st ship is sunk), the 11 man team is not at a disadvantage and has the same chance to win. As you say that is definitely an opinion.

 

 

No didn't  say that, what I said was in one team is stacked and the other has half a team of new player then the effect of losing a ship is greater on the weaker team. 

 

 

[monpetitloup]

3 hours ago, kgh52 said:

So you are saying it is illogical to assume 23  equally skilled players split into one 11 team & one 12 man team (this is what you will have once the 1st ship is sunk), the 11 man team is not at a disadvantage and has the same chance to win. As you say that is definitely an opinion.

 

 

You are ignoring that this game is defined by rng. One team will get better rng than the other and that besides the (in)competence of particular players would change the outcome of an « evenly balanced » team.

[SKurj]

2 hours ago, vikingno2 said:

No didn't  say that, what I said was in one team is stacked and the other has half a team of new player then the effect of losing a ship is greater on the weaker team. 

 

 

and what if the worst player in the game is on the best team and dies first?

remember every match, you have a 50% chance you will be on the "stacked" team