Steamrolls, what people get wrong in how to fix them.

[IronWolfV]

Ok guys, last week and a half I've seen atleast 2 threads that basically boil down on how to fix steam rolls. Now noone like them.  I don't either. They are bland, boring and really don't produce that good competitive feeling. However having said that, I'm going to tell you all an ugly truth.

 

Before I dive into that, let me establish my background.  I've been playing tanks since 2011, and ships since Dec 2014 since the last Beta Weekend hit before CBT.  I have almost 30,000 battles in tanks, I've played it all. Clan wars, Tank Companies, the 8v8 tier 8 SBMM team battles WG tried, Tournaments, Randoms, you name it, I've played it in tanks.  And MM in tanks, is basically the same as the MM in ships with a few differences.

 

Now having said all of that, guys Steam rolls are the standard. Not the anomaly.  And unlike most of you who think that making things even, or full blown SBMM will solve the issue, I'm here to tell you it exacerbates the situation even worse.  Cause if you've ever played tanks and done Tank Companies, Clan Wars or tournaments, you know exactly what I am talking about.  You basically take your best, vs someone else's best(and depending on circumstances both teams tend to be pretty equal) and you go at it.  Guys with this, it's like the first leaf of autumn.  The team that makes the first mistake and gives an opening, is the team that 8/10 gets hammered into scrap.

 

And that will not change over here in ships. I hate to burst the dream bubble that SBMM or evening out teams once MM selects 24 people is going to magically solve steamrolls and make matches more even.  It won't, not in the long run. Steamrolls are going to happen, and even more frequently when teams are divided by skill. 

 

I also see the fallacy of saying this game should be an e-sport, then want it likened to something like soccer/football, or baseball.  Guys this is what you're also failing to understand.  WG games like Ships, tanks and planes are equal to dodgeball.  And if you've ever played the game or watched that silly movie, vary rarely does it come down to a close game.  Most times, one side destroys the other side.

 

 

TL;DR Steamrolls are a fact of life. And SBMM fixing it, is a false oasis. It doesn't fix it. IT MAKES IT WORSE. How would I know? A good lot of experience playing these games.

[B4lduR_28]

I fully agree that it would make the situation worse and not just that but also more boring....

[1nv4d3rZ1m]

There was a study done in WOT where somebody compared the XVM expected win prediction of steamrolls and the result was that steamrolls are at least as likely in balanced matches. (i.e. 50% expected +-5%) 

 

The thing is with steamrolls is that it is about building up momentum, one ship dies giving a flank an overmatch which they then actually take advantage of killing off the rest of the flank building up their lead. The thing that stops steam rolls is not having more equal fodder but having a player good enough to slow down a push and bring back balance to a game or likewise a player bad enough to shut down his team's momentum.

 

Evenly balanced teams are the 2nd most likely steamrolls after extremely unbalanced teams. 

[chewonit]

What are steamrolls?

[IronWolfV]

There was a study done in WOT where somebody compared the XVM expected win prediction of steamrolls and the result was that steamrolls are at least as likely in balanced matches. (i.e. 50% expected +-5%) 

 

The thing is with steamrolls is that it is about building up momentum, one ship dies giving a flank an overmatch which they then actually take advantage of killing off the rest of the flank building up their lead. The thing that stops steam rolls is not having more equal fodder but having a player good enough to slow down a push and bring back balance to a game or likewise a player bad enough to shut down his team's momentum.

 

Evenly balanced teams are the 2nd most likely steamrolls after extremely unbalanced teams. 

 

And that my friend is another point. It comes down to the decisions made in game on how to slow down or stop a steamroll.  Something MM can't fix and or predict.

[Skramjet]

It's about the passiveness of gameplay. In an aggressive game, it boils down to a fiery bloodbath. But in 90% of the games I play, as soon as the BBs see an enemy ship they turn away. Leaving me as the only target. If there was a more aggressive meta, it would be a more fun game. I'm sure there are ways to fix this (i.e. dispersion at range) but until it is, the game will continue to be uneventful for most players. And the aggressive team will almost always win in a domination mode. They get the points, drive the DDs out. But in a passive game it comes down to the better DDs and the better shooters.

[CAPTMUDDXX]

chewonit a steam roll is where one team just dominates the match in every way ie 12 kills no losses in a very short time

[Kingfishercritic]

What are steamrolls?

 

Really good chinese food I had last night..............

 

 

 

Oh. Thought you meant Steamed rolls.

[mofton]

What is SBMM?

 

Something balanced match maker?

[Skramjet]

What is SBMM?

 

Something balanced match maker?

 

​Skill based match making.

[Edgecase]

I can't help but feel the OP is saying "steamrolling" but talking about "snowballing".

[Shatara422]

What is SBMM?

 

Something balanced match maker?

 

Skill based matchmaker. Something occasionally suggested(/demanded) as a solution to blowouts/steamrolls/snowballs/whatever we're calling it these days.

 

As OP said, though, it's not an issue with skill or even ship mismatch. MWO has had several iterations of skill-based matchmaking, and still everyone complains of blowouts. When skills are equal on both sides, it comes down to simple DPS vs HP, and the first side to lose a ship is suddenly short on both. It's pretty much how it goes in every slow-TTK game out there, honestly. There aren't many ways to ambush and kill multiple ships before they can lay a hurting on you (and the things that can are of course the most hated things in the game).

[IronWolfV]

 

Skill based matchmaker. Something occasionally suggested(/demanded) as a solution to blowouts/steamrolls/snowballs/whatever we're calling it these days.

 

As OP said, though, it's not an issue with skill or even ship mismatch. MWO has had several iterations of skill-based matchmaking, and still everyone complains of blowouts. When skills are equal on both sides, it comes down to simple DPS vs HP, and the first side to lose a ship is suddenly short on both. It's pretty much how it goes in every slow-TTK game out there, honestly. There aren't many ways to ambush and kill multiple ships before they can lay a hurting on you (and the things that can are of course the most hated things in the game).

 

Please have a +1 thanks for understanding!

[VTAdmiral]

I'm not sure if information gleaned from Tanks is really applicable in this case. Tanks tend to be a lot less durable than ships, don't they? Most ships, even cruisers, can take quite a beating before going down and a half-health battleship can easily go off and take out an entire flank before pushing on the back line (as I did in Yamato last night, they finally killed me in their own cap 130k damage and 4 sunk cruisers/destroyers/their Yamato later).

 

In tanks, it's my understanding that one-shot deaths are commonplace. In Warships, they're a rarity (despite what Detonation opponents will claim, Dev Strike happens way more often and still accounts for less than half of the kills I witness).

 

Though I do see where you're coming from, I'm not sure if this data is really that applicable. They are fundamentally different games.

[awiggin]

What are steamrolls?

 

Those games where all your DD's die in the first two mins, half your team is dead in the first four, and you end up spending the last few minutes dodging incoming from every direction due to you being one of the few targets left.

[IronWolfV]

I'm not sure if information gleaned from Tanks is really applicable in this case. Tanks tend to be a lot less durable than ships, don't they? Most ships, even cruisers, can take quite a beating before going down and a half-health battleship can easily go off and take out an entire flank before pushing on the back line (as I did in Yamato last night, they finally killed me in their own cap 130k damage and 4 sunk cruisers/destroyers/their Yamato later).

 

In tanks, it's my understanding that one-shot deaths are commonplace. In Warships, they're a rarity (despite what Detonation opponents will claim, Dev Strike happens way more often and still accounts for less than half of the kills I witness).

 

Though I do see where you're coming from, I'm not sure if this data is really that applicable. They are fundamentally different games.

 

Actually that's incorrect.  They have differences but they are at their core the SAME game. It just takes longer to kill a ship than a tank.  But the same thing applies. First team to make a major mistake is usually the one that gets hammered into pieces.

[VTAdmiral]

 

Actually that's incorrect.  They have differences but they are at their core the SAME game. It just takes longer to kill a ship than a tank.  But the same thing applies. First team to make a major mistake is usually the one that gets hammered into pieces.

 

Yeah but experience has taught me that if something takes a long time to die, there's more opportunity for it to swing back. This is especially true of battleships. If a couple cruisers are bullying a battleship and it suddenly triple-citadels one of them to death, then swings the guns towards the other one, suddenly the tables have turned.

 

This doesn't happen in tanks, to my knowledge? Correct me if I'm wrong.

[IronWolfV]

 

Yeah but experience has taught me that if something takes a long time to die, there's more opportunity for it to swing back. This is especially true of battleships. If a couple cruisers are bullying a battleship and it suddenly triple-citadels one of them to death, then swings the guns towards the other one, suddenly the tables have turned.

 

This doesn't happen in tanks, to my knowledge? Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Actually it happens all the time in tanks. Where angling means some in Ships, it means EVERYTHING in tanks. Only times you really get 1 shot is if you show your side, most heavies either side scrape, go hull down only showing their turrets or angle in such a way that getting an ammo rack detonation is hard as hell to do.

 

There are many times heavies in tanks or even mediums have swung a battle, but it's about as rare in ships as it is in tanks.

 

Have to remember, even with surviving a bit longer in ships, it's the exact same process. Just trust me on this.

[4bRbyHSSzZ6pk]

Skill based matchmaking? Nope, it wouldn't fix a thing.

[VTAdmiral]

 

Actually it happens all the time in tanks. Where angling means some in Ships, it means EVERYTHING in tanks. Only times you really get 1 shot is if you show your side, most heavies either side scrape, go hull down only showing their turrets or angle in such a way that getting an ammo rack detonation is hard as hell to do.

 

There are many times heavies in tanks or even mediums have swung a battle, but it's about as rare in ships as it is in tanks.

 

Have to remember, even with surviving a bit longer in ships, it's the exact same process. Just trust me on this.

 

fair enough, retracted.

[Izolyn]

I'm not sure if information gleaned from Tanks is really applicable in this case. Tanks tend to be a lot less durable than ships, don't they? Most ships, even cruisers, can take quite a beating before going down and a half-health battleship can easily go off and take out an entire flank before pushing on the back line (as I did in Yamato last night, they finally killed me in their own cap 130k damage and 4 sunk cruisers/destroyers/their Yamato later).

 

In tanks, it's my understanding that one-shot deaths are commonplace. In Warships, they're a rarity (despite what Detonation opponents will claim, Dev Strike happens way more often and still accounts for less than half of the kills I witness).

 

Though I do see where you're coming from, I'm not sure if this data is really that applicable. They are fundamentally different games.

 

You also have to remember that instances of a single ship really turning the tide of a battle doesn't happen often in this game. It's the "player good enough to slow down a push" that Zim mentioned. Thing is, one player being able to turn the tide of a battle requires there to be a significant skill difference. If you and your enemies are equal in skill, then one of you = one of your enemies, no more, no less. This would change some based on the interactions between different ships (e.g. Battleship beats cruiser, so one battleship might beat two cruisers of equal skill, and a higher-tier ship beats a lower-tier ship), but MM already balances those factors as best it can.

 

I can't help but feel the OP is saying "steamrolling" but talking about "snowballing".

 

I think that in this case the two terms go hand-in-hand. A steamroll happens when one side gains an advantage (e.g. getting First Blood) and actually uses that advantage properly - if they got the first kill, then not only do they now outnumber their opponents, but they clearly outgun them as well; so if they use the opportunity to push forward, it causes things to snowball. SBMM wouldn't change this, because if the players have theoretically equal skill, then each player on one team is equal to one player on the enemy team. Once one person messes up and gets killed, it's now 11 against 12 and simple numbers dictates that the 12 wins.

 

Aside from all of that, I think that SBMM would be a very bad thing just because it would pretty much negate any desire to improve. There's no point in trying to become unicum if all it does is get you matched up against other unicums; nothing would change.

[Soshi_Sone]

What are steamrolls?

 

They're like eggrolls, but instead of baking or frying 'em, you steam 'em.

[Edgecase]

I think that in this case the two terms go hand-in-hand. A steamroll happens when one side gains an advantage (e.g. getting First Blood) and actually uses that advantage properly - if they got the first kill, then not only do they now outnumber their opponents, but they clearly outgun them as well; so if they use the opportunity to push forward, it causes things to snowball. SBMM wouldn't change this, because if the players have theoretically equal skill, then each player on one team is equal to one player on the enemy team. Once one person messes up and gets killed, it's now 11 against 12 and simple numbers dictates that the 12 wins.

 

Snowballing vs. Steamrolling

"Snowballing" refers to a situation in which a small advantage allows a team to create a larger one, creating a positive feedback cycle that becomes virtually unstoppable. Games with heavily interdependent classes lend themselves to "snowballing" because, e.g., the loss of a healer causes cascading deaths and eventually party wipe. Games that simultaneously empower players for kills and penalize the killed player also lend themselves to "snowballing", e.g. feeding in MOBAs.

 

"Steamrolling" is an outcome in which one team defeats the other with a minimum of effort or resistance in a way that seems unstoppable, i.e. "rolls" over them like a steamroller.

 

Snowballing mechanics can cause steamrolls to happen. When a critical player gets knocked out early, the rest of the team may not be able to function adequately, and will slowly bleed HP/units/towers/points until they lose. However, not all steamrolls are caused by snowballing. Pro-level players will steamroll pubs whether there are cascading advantages in a game or not. This occurs even when there are anti-snowball mechanics, as fighting games often have (e.g., gaining meter when hit, diminishing damage on juggles).* Pro vs. scrub will result in a steamroll, even in the absence of snowballing.

 

High-level vs. Equal teams

"High level" play is that which involves skilled players on both teams, and no unskilled players. There can be some minor skill spread, but all players' skill is far above average.

 

"Equal teams" refers to two teams whose average skill levels and skill spread are similar to each other. They can both be low, both high, or both a similar mix of skill levels. It is therefore incorrect to say that equalizing team skill is the same as raising it; you could end up with two low-skill teams, or two mixed-skill teams. Neither of those situations would trend toward high-level play.

 

High-level play in any game does lend itself to snowballing, because better players can better convert an opening into an advantage. Increased snowball potential at high levels of play can increase steamrolls. However, this increase is connected to being high-level, not equal or unequal skill.

 

Unequal teams always lends itself to steamrolling, as per the example before. An all-pro team will steamroll a pub team. Their doing so is not related to snowballing small advantages into big ones; they already have a huge advantage, and thus they win. Do they also accumulate an EVEN LARGER advantage as the other team loses members? Yes. Is turning a huge advantage into a ridiculously huge advantage the reason they're steamrolling the pub team, though? No, the outcome was already decided by the original team skill differential. If that initial skill inequality had not been there, the potential for a steamroll would have been reduced. Equal teams reduce the potential for a steamroll based solely on egregious skill imbalance.

 

Skill-based Matchmaking (SBMM)

SBMM creates equal teams. This innately reduces the chances of a steamroll due to straight-up skill imbalance between the teams.

 

Some types of SBMM try to create matches containing only players of similar skill levels. Those types of SBMM will create some games which are high-level, and thus have higher snowball->steamroll potential. This type of SBMM would offset the reduction in unequal-teams steamrolling by increasing the amount of snowballing->steamrolling that occurs due to high skill in the upper skill bracket matches.

 

Other types of SBMM just take the first X players in queue regardless of skill, but then splits the unicums, etc., between teams so each team has roughly equal overall skill. When done this way, equalizing skill between the two teams does not raise the overall level of skill in the match, and thus does not increase the snowball->steamroll potential. Skill-imbalance steamrolls would still be reduced, due to the reduction of skill imbalance between the teams.

 

It's the second category of SBMM that I think is the promising one as far as reducing steamrolls while avoiding the effects the OP described.

 

TL;DR: Snowballing can cause steamrolls, but not all steamrolls are caused by snowballing. Sometimes it's just sheer skill difference. SBMM eliminates those cases. When done right, equalizing skill does not mean raising skill.

 

A WoWS example of anti-snowballing is exhausted HP in a ship section, which effectively gives a ship partial damage immunity/reduction.

 

[MorbidGamer]

Here is how a steam roll happens...

• People ask for a plan... The more people who ask and reply is a tell tail idea that the game will be a loss.
• People refuse to look at the mini map and play according to that.
• Most of the players lose 50% of their HP while the other team still has over 80%.
• No concept of flanks or strategic retreats.
• AFK players.
• Lemming trains.
• Spawn camping.
• No willingness to push.

 

Telling anyone how to play the game is met with harsh back lash. So they just keep on losing.

[awildseaking]

I think steamrolls are a major issue in WoT, but I've never even seen one in WoWS. Ships aren't deleted as easily as tanks, so no engagement is truly one sided. In tanks you can outright lose 5-6 teammates in the first two minutes without doing a single point of damage or spotting anyone, but that cannot happen here. There isn't really a dodging mechanic in tanks either, so a 25% hp tank is a lot less valuable than a 25% hp boat. The only dodging you can do is blocking, which is easily invalidated by gold rounds or simply being in a tank incapable of blocking the enemy regardless of angles. WoT also has a horrible problem with tiering that makes certain tanks unusable during a steamroll. If you're 2 tiers down in a medium, you cannot carry. You are support and nothing more. If your best mates fail you, that's the end of your game. Tiers in WoWS are much less visible except for CV vs enemy AA. A Nicholas or Gnevny can absolutely dominate a Hatsuharu. WoT simply doesn't have this kind of balance, so steamrolls happen in most games. Steamrolls don't happen here. There's a lot of snowballing, but there should be snowballing. If you lose core units in your fleet, you will either have to make up for them or suffer the consequences. You can alter your strategy based on what others do, but if some idiot gets himself killed too quickly, there's no undoing that. You will see these idiots in any game with any type of matchmaker. I remember when I was playing ranked, I was deleting a cruiser within the first two minutes in almost every game I played with the Fusou. There is no such thing as a matchmaker that stops a cruiser from sailing broadside to a long ranged battleship.