Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • IronGuard

      World of Warships Forum Rules   06/08/2017

        Welcome to the Official World of Warships ASIA forums! These forums are here to provide you with a friendly atmosphere where you can discuss ideas, give and receive game play advice, and discuss any other aspects of World of Warships with other players. Community forums are at their best when participants treat their fellow posters with respect and courtesy. Therefore, we ask that you conduct yourself in a civilized manner when participating on these forums and be mindful of your audience.   The guidelines and rules listed below explain what behaviours is expected of you and what behaviour you can expect from other community members. Note that the following guidelines are not exhaustive, and may not address all manner of offensive behaviour. As such, the forum moderators and administrators shall have full discretion to address any behaviour that they feel is inappropriate. Also, suspension or banishment from the game will always result in the same in regard to forum access. Your access to these forums is a “privilege,” and not a “right.” Wargaming.net reserves the right to suspend your access to these forums at any time for reasons that include, but are not necessarily limited to, your failure to abide by these guidelines.   Wargaming.net reserves the right to evaluate each incident on a case by case basis. The actions taken may be more lenient or more severe than those listed under each category. Before posting any kind of information on this forum, all users are to read the following rules. These rules are obligatory for all registered users on this forum.     1. GENERAL PROVISIONS   1.1 Registration Requirements   There is no requirement for a user to use his or her real name or to use any other form of identification that can be used to easily trace identities, and all e-mail addresses that are provided will be kept private. In order to register on World of Warships forum, registrants must be thirteen (13) years of age or older.   Users are solely responsible for protecting their accounts from access by others. Users are strongly encouraged to select a hard-to-guess password and not re-use that password on any other sites where it may be read by the owners or administrators of that site. It is highly recommended that board users do not share their accounts with others, or share their computers used to access the site with others. In case of a lost or hacked account, users are to inform support immediately.   1.2 Forum purpose   The purpose of this forum is to discuss World of Warships and related topics, get to know fellow players, find a clan to join, and to give feedback to the Wargaming.net developers.   1.3 Responsibility   Wargaming.net is not responsible for any user messages posted. Wargaming.net does not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and is not responsible for the contents of any message. The messages express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of this board. Any user who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to contact the moderation team immediately. Wargaming.net employees and community moderators have the ability to remove objectionable messages and will make every effort to do so, within a reasonable time limit, if it is found that removal is necessary. Users agree, through the use of this service, that they will not use this forum to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law. Users agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by said user or by this board.   1.4 Sanction Policy   Violations of these rules/guidelines may lead to users being sanctioned temporarily or permanently within this forum or even in game bans of a players account on severe or repetitive offenses.   1.5 Error reporting   Bugs and errors can be reported at the support website (http://support.worldoftanks.asia/), Users can also report any bugs and errors on the corresponding forum thread.     2. PROHIBITIONS and RESTRICTIONS   2.1 Forum etiquette   Users are not allowed to abuse others, make personal attacks or behave disrespectfully. This prohibition applies to both public threads and private messages (PMs).   Disrespect can include but is not limited to: FlamingTrollingHarassment or Defamatory remarksProfanity, Inappropriate language or abbreviations there ofPersonal abuse or attacksRacial, Religious, Sexual, National or Ethnic, slurs or insults, this includes "jokes" in bad taste.Excessive CapitalizationInappropriate or adult content   This behaviour has no place on the World of Warships forums due to its extremely offensive and inappropriate nature.   2.2 Distribution of real life information and real-life threats   Postings and discussions which have users’ personal data (such as addresses, telephone numbers, emails, other contact information) - regardless of whether this is their own or that of other users - will be removed. Users who publish this type of content on the forum will be warned or sanctioned by an administrator or moderator. No rude or disrespectful posts to or about any forum moderators or Wargaming.net employees, as well as no release of real-life information about moderators or Wargaming.net employees are allowed on this forum. Real-life threats include both clear and masked language and/or links to websites containing such language or images which refers to violence in any capacity that is not directly related to the game world   2.3 Advertising   Users are not allowed to post threads or comments that advertise or solicit any non-beneficial, non-Wargaming related businesses, organization, or website. Explicit advertising and solicitation in signatures are also prohibited.   Forum rules allow "light" discussion other games; however any kind of direct promotion, solicitation, or linking to other games is not permitted. Also please do not use images related to games other than World of Warships in your signature, avatar or name.   2.4 Accounts, Gold/Credits, Pre-order & Promotional codes, Leveling services, Begging.   This category includes: Advertising of, or selling of game accounts. Advertising of, or selling of in game currency such as gold/credits. Advertising of, or selling of leveling services. Advertising of, or selling of promotional codes or pre-order codes. Begging in any form. Begging includes but is not limited to: requesting users to transfer real money to the virtual wallet, asking for additional gold/credits, and requests to transfer game gold/credits, promotional codes, pre-order codes, or anything similar. Linking to or promoting websites that contain the above prohibited services.   All types of posts for the sale or promotion of the exchange or transfer of accounts, currency, codes, and other services from one user to another violate the EULA and are prohibited within the forums and game channels.   2.5 Off Topic, spamming and trolling   This category includes: Excessively communicating the same phrase, similar phrases, or pure gibberishCreating threads on topics that already exist on the forums, (Please use search and add to existing topics were possible)Off-topic PostingCreating threads/posts for the sole purpose of causing unrest on the forumsCreating threads/posts for purpose of reporting or discussing in game violations. Such incidences are to be directed to supportCausing disturbances in forum threads, such as picking fights, making off topic posts that ruin the thread, insulting other postersMaking non-constructive posts, or posts with non-constructive topicsAbusing the "Reported Post" feature by sending false alarms or nonsensical messagesNumbering a thread, posting “First!”, “IBTL” (“in before thread lock”) or any other fad statements“Bumping” posts are only permitted in the clan recruiting sections of the forums, please refer to the rules for that section.Petition posts or polls that are not aimed at conducting a discussion.   Users should make sure that they post new threads and postings into the appropriate forum, and users are asked to familiarize themselves with the forums. This helps other users and moderators maintain an overview and to be able to respond faster with an appropriate answer to players questions. Before beginning a new thread, look to see if an active thread on that topic has already been established using the Search feature. If so, place your comments there instead. Keep discussions about one topic to one thread only.   Posts which drift off topic, or content-free posts will be edited or removed. Posting multiple messages with the same content across several forums is unwelcome and inappropriate, since such activities divide the targeted discussions and makes gathering feedback considerably more difficult. Such ‘cross posts’ will be merged, closed and redirected or removed. Before beginning a new thread, look to see if an active thread on that topic has already been established using the Search feature. If so, place your comments there instead. Keep discussions about one topic to one thread only.   2.6 Politics, Major Religions or Religious Figures   Posting about social, religious, political, illegal or other controversial topics that may create offense. As well as negative portrayal of religious and political figures is prohibited within the forums.   2.7 Law Violations   This category includes: Posting discussion threads on, or linking to, cheats, hacks, Trojan horses, or malicious programs. If you suspect that a cheat or hack exists, provide the necessary information to support, it is not to be discussed within the forums.Posting unreleased content / hacking data files: showing unreleased in-game items, equipment, or areas that have been unlocked by hacking into client data files; discussing or displaying any data not available through normal game play;Illegal drugs or activities. Both clear and masked language and/or links to websites containing such language or images which reference to abusing illegal drugs or to performing illegal activities are prohibited.   Users are expected to act lawfully when participating on the forums. Posting about or discussing issues that violate local or international laws is not allowed under any circumstance. The administration reserves the right to delete, update or modify any information which is considered inappropriate on these forums.   2.8 Discussing disciplinary actions   Discussion or disputing of disciplinary actions is prohibited within the forums.   This category includes: Creating posts or threads to discuss or dispute disciplinary actions taken against a player in game or on the forumsCreating posts or threads to discuss or dispute moderators, moderator decisions or actions   Appeals on sanctions received or questions and suggestions relating to rule enforcement are to be submitted to support and are not to be discussed within the forums.   3. MISCELLANEOUS   3.1 Language   The official language of this forum is English. Use of other languages may be allowed in special forum sections only. Users are to be considerate to those who have difficulties with English.   3.2 Hard-to-Read Posts   Posts that disrupt the message boards for other users, intentional or not, are prohibited. This category includes, but is not limited, to: Conducting conversations in foreign languages, outside designated forums Posting excessively in capital letters, Excessive whitespace or line breaks, leet speak, or other hard-to-read writing styles Using misleading topic titles, excessive punctuation, and/or non-standard symbols   While posting on these forums users are to be reasonable with font size and color. Stick to default font size and try to avoid use of text colors different from black. The administration reserves the right to modify inappropriate posts and give warnings to their authors.   3.3 Links and Images   Whenever linking to a website or image or posting an image, be sure to check that they don't violate any of the rules above. Sites or images that display illegal content, pornography, nudity, gratuitous violence, Nazi symbols such as swastikas, obscenities and any other content that goes against the standards of this community will be moderated. In addition to the above we also request you not post ASCII art (pictures created by using letters and symbols on a keyboard) they are usually quite large and can be misinterpreted based on display issues.   The size of files and images referred may not exceed 100 kilobytes (kb).   3.4 Names (Players and Clans), Avatars, Images/Video, Signatures & Clan logos   Certain content for names, avatars, images/video, signatures & clan logos, have no place on the World of Warships forums or within the World of Warships game, due to their extremely offensive, annoying or inappropriate nature. The following list is only a summary, but it gives some idea of names, images, signatures, avatars and clan logos which are not accepted with the World of Warships environment: Names, Avatars, Images/Video, Signatures & Clan logos .... that contains insults, personal attacks, abuse or harassment. that contains unprintable words or abbreviations, or which are unattractive and/or unreadable. which have (in any way) racist or nationalistic implications which may create offense to a certain nation, ethnic, religious or racial group. that contain an allusion of racial or national supremacy, as well as discriminative propaganda on any level. which are derogatory discriminative or offensive to people with a disability or illness. which have an association with sexuality, pedophilia, sexual abuse; or have an offensive connection to the human body or bodily functions. which contain excessive gore or violence, or are obscene/vulgar. which make reference to addictive or illegal substances or their use, or any other illegal activities. which either in whole or partly contain copyrighted or registered trade mark elements. that contain reference to current mainstream religions that may create offense, i.e. names such as God, Jesus, Allah, etc. that contain Logotypes, symbols, emblems or figures connected in one way or another with organizations, that violate or were violating existing laws and rules (For example, using different variations of Nazi symbolic, abridgments and signs as well as credentials, names and surnames of Nazi leaders) which may provoke strong negative reaction/association or promote national/ethnic/religious hatred. that are connected with negative historical or political personalities, first of all those who are judged by international courts for crimes against humanity, those that generally arouse feelings of suffering or disgust in the majority of people, as well as members of currently existing terrorist organizations; that negatively portraits the projects moderators, staff or administration; which in any other manner violates the End User License Agreement or local laws;   ....... either implicitly or explicitly are prohibited (This also contains links to websites containing the above). If names (player or clan), avatars, signatures, images/video, clan logos within the forums or within the game violate these rules the offending account may be changed and/or the accounts may be sanctioned or suspended. Moreover, the administration reserves the right to delete, update or modify any names (player or clans) and avatars, images or clan images which are considered inappropriate on the forums or within the game environment.   Additionally, excessively long forum signatures are not permitted. Signatures may not exceed two lines. If these limitations are exceeded, then the disruptive elements will be removed without explanation and the offending account may receive sanctions. Users are allowed to use images in your signatures, but their size must not exceed 468px×120px (length x width). The signatures can contain animation, but it should not be annoying.   4. FORUM ADMINISTRATION and MODERATION   4.1 Administrators   Administrators are Wargaming.net employees. The administrator status is confirmed by “Group: Administrators, Game Master, Developer, Support” inscription under the user nickname.   4.2 Moderators   Moderators are community contributors (players) Recruited from forum members, the moderators uphold the forum rules, with the Game Master team. The moderator status is confirmed by “Group: "Forum Moderators” inscription under the user nickname.   4.3 Administrators and Moderators’ powers   Administrators and moderators have the right to warn or suspend forum members in the case of forum rules violation. Any measures taken by moderators can be appealed to support via the website (http://asia.wargaming.net/support/), in accordance with the established procedure. Measures taken by administration are not subject to appeal. In some cases, which go beyond the forum rules, administrators can warn or suspend a particular forum member, even if their actions formally don’t fall under the current prohibitions and restrictions.   4.4 Warnings   The warnings and official notifications are set off in red, this font color is reserved by Moderators and Administrators. Any other moderators message is considered to be an ordinary one and is equal to a message of any forum member. Once one of a posts has been moderated, users are not permitted to edit the moderators notes placed within the post. Similarly, the impersonation of the administration or moderating team in any way, is not permitted.   4.5 Restrictions on Administrators and Moderators   Administrators Game Masters Developers and support staff being official employees are representatives of Wargaming.net, they are avid World of Warships players, but do not normally partake in clans and clan wars with the exception of special events.   Moderators however are not official employees of Wargaming.net and recruited from the player base. They have no special abilities in game to give them any advantage, other than the ability to issue chat mutes within the game. Moderators participation within clans or clan-wars is not limited. If users believe a moderator to be biased in any way or acted inappropriately, they are to send the details to support via the website (http://asia.wargaming.net/support/) and it shall be investigated by management.   5. CONTACT LIST   1. Technical Support service (both forum and in-game):   Web form: (http://asia.wargaming.net/support/) for Billing and Payment issues - Billing and Payment department for technical problems and bugs - Technical issues department for forum and game name and password changes - Account Administration department for disputes on game or forum bans, or disputes against moderators or their decisions and actions. for inquiries that don’t suit the above, including reporting hacks, cheats, Trojans, bots etc - In-game general questions department   2. Appeals   The report should contain the complete description of the dispute with the corresponding screenshots attached if needed. Any other ways of appeal are not subject to consideration. Any appeals lodged within the forums are regarded as off-topic.   IMPORTANT   The administration reserves the right to update and modify these rules as the needs of the community dictate to ensure the smooth operation of this community.   Repeatedly violating any area of these Rules or EULA, including the areas detailed above, will often result in permanent suspension from the game and/or forums. This policy is not language-restrictive. Language that falls under this policy will always be subject to the repercussions listed, whether it is inappropriate in English or any other language.   The bottom line is that we want World of Warships to be a fun and safe environment for all players. World of Warships is a Massive Multiplayer Online Game with a mixture of genres, and the key words are “Massively Multiplayer.” While playing this game and posting on its forums, you will encounter thousands of other players who share different experiences and come from vastly different backgrounds. While certain language and images may not be offensive to you, consider the fact that that same language and images may have a completely different effect on someone else. We’ve done everything we can to make this a great game but now it’s up to you, the players, to breathe life into the world.  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Rina_Pon

Mirrored matchmaking introduced in 0.7.4

23 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

240 posts
3,798 battles

https://worldofwarships.asia/en/news/common/ver-07_4-patchnotes/#balance_change

Quote

We’ve taken the next step in enhancing the work of the matchmaking algorithm. This time, in Random Battles. Now, for a period of three minutes after the first player in the queue for battle pressed the "Battle" button, teams will be matched to mirror each other's lineup. It means that the lineups of opposing teams will be identical by ship types and tiers. This change is expected to produce maximum effect during the day and in the evening when there are enough players in queue for battle. To avoid long queue times during a lower server population time, the matchmaker will revert to the previous operation should the waiting time exceed three minutes.

I have three issues with this.

1. It's not what people were asking for. What people were asking for was skill based matchmaking. The problem was not ship asymmetry, e.i. Nelson vs. Colorado, it was skill asymmetry, for example unicum Kaga player vs. noob Kaga player.

2. It's boring. Each team has the same ship roster. Like in Co-op. I want more variety in Random, not less. I'm willing to play a few matches with a handicap (disadvantaged) team lineup because statistics means I'll also get the same number where I have an advantage.

3. This is going to increase wait times considerably, especially for people who play less popular ships. Good luck Belfast. Kami R. Kii. Yubari. Texas. ... Flint? just forget it.

Edited by Rina_Pon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
297 posts
8,126 battles

It's not going to match ships - just ship types and tiers.

eg if there's a t7 bb on one team it will try to ensure there's a t7 bb on the other team.

Edited by Moldavia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
526 posts
6,228 battles
1 hour ago, Rina_Pon said:

1. It's not what people were asking for. What people were asking for was skill based matchmaking. The problem was not ship asymmetry, e.i. Nelson vs. Colorado, it was skill asymmetry, for example unicum Kaga player vs. noob Kaga player.

2. It's boring. Each team has the same ship roster. Like in Co-op. I want more variety in Random, not less. I'm willing to play a few matches with a handicap (disadvantaged) team lineup because statistics means I'll also get the same number where I have an advantage.

3. This is going to increase wait times considerably, especially for people who play less popular ships. Good luck Belfast. Kami R. Kii. Yubari. Texas. ... Flint? just forget it.

A few people were asking for skill based matchmaking, definitely not most.  This wouldn't be great considering everyone's win rate would just stick around 50%.  There's no feeling of advancement through getting better by winning more.

Also, you've misunderstood the changes.  It's pairing tier and class so they are identical, not actual ship types.  If you queue in a Flint, it will look for another T7 cruiser to pair you with, not another Flint.  It will prefer a US T7 cruiser, but this isn't a necessity.

These are good changes, but I personally didn't think there was much wrong with the old match making.  I don't remember ever going in to a battle and thinking 'MM has stuffed us and we can't win'.  I just assess what strengths and weaknesses each team has, and play accordingly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240 posts
3,798 battles
1 hour ago, Moggytwo said:

Also, you've misunderstood the changes.  It's pairing tier and class so they are identical, not actual ship types.  If you queue in a Flint, it will look for another T7 cruiser to pair you with, not another Flint.  It will prefer a US T7 cruiser, but this isn't a necessity.

These are good changes, but I personally didn't think there was much wrong with the old match making.  I don't remember ever going in to a battle and thinking 'MM has stuffed us and we can't win'.  I just assess what strengths and weaknesses each team has, and play accordingly.

If that's correct and it's only coercing MM by type i.e. BB, DD then it's not that much different from what it is now where it's almost always within +/- 1 (i.e. some times one team has one more DD and one less cruiser, but I've personally never seen say 1DD  vs 3DD)

I agree with you in that I never felt MM was broken.  I just learned to roll with the variance. Some of the outlier matches were quite funny.

Edited by Rina_Pon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
126 posts
3,817 battles
1 hour ago, Moggytwo said:

These are good changes, but I personally didn't think there was much wrong with the old match making.  

 

4 minutes ago, Rina_Pon said:

I agree with you in that I never felt MM was broken.  I just learned to roll with the variance. Some of the outlier matches were quite funny.

If the old MM is not broken and most players are good with how it matches up ships, then why do we have to wait for an increased time now in the queue? :fish_viking:

IMO the the most impactful change this will bring is increased wait times to enter a battle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
445 posts
7,676 battles

What I have against the so called "skill based MM" that people keep asking for in WoWs:
>First of all, a true skill based MM that only matches you up against players who are close to you in stats will never be possible due to the game being 12v12 and the player count being insuffiecient. Even in some other online games with millions of players and cross server MM with skill based MM and only 5v5 format, finding a match takes quite some time

>The other option is to not limit MM to players within your skill range but instead mirror players of equal skill in each team. i.e, each team gets the same number of unicums and red stats players. This is a horrible solution for anyone with any level of competence because they are being punished for being good and their wr will fall towards 50% while players who earlier had 40% wr will see their wr approach 50% without really contributing much to their teams. Why would anyone want such a system?

We already have limited skill based MM in the form of clan wars and ranked.
Sure I understand the frustration when you try your best but you get an incompetent team while the enemy gets a good team. But over a large number of games you will get good and bad teams(compared to enemy) equally. So your win rate is a reflection of your own ability to carry some of the bad teams. If you think that you keep getting worse teams than the enemy, remember that YOU are the only constant in all those games while your enemies and allies keep changing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
526 posts
6,228 battles
5 minutes ago, Adm_Kunkka said:

We already have limited skill based MM in the form of clan wars and ranked.

This is true.  At any point there is generally going to be a ranked or CB season happening, both of them have skill based MM to some degree.  If any people would prefer skill based MM, these are the modes they should play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,070 posts

skill base MM at standard random battle would end up in catastrophe for sure.

(well, it may be fine for most player but those who has 60+ win-rate would wait for HOUR to play, and worst, they would drag other standard player with 50 rate in team to wait with them.)

 

so, let it be only for clan or rank battle.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240 posts
3,798 battles
1 hour ago, Adm_Kunkka said:

>The other option is to not limit MM to players within your skill range but instead mirror players of equal skill in each team. i.e, each team gets the same number of unicums and red stats players. This is a horrible solution for anyone with any level of competence because they are being punished for being good and their wr will fall towards 50% while players who earlier had 40% wr will see their wr approach 50% without really contributing much to their teams. Why would anyone want such a system?

Well, what people were asking for, in essence, was for skill-based MM only where it reduced the chance of them losing. i.e. they were upset and grasped whatever appeared to solve their problem (more good players on my team!) without thinking it through to the logical conclusion.

No one complains when the unicum CV is on their team!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
297 posts
8,126 battles

I'd like it if there were enough players to reduce the tier difference to +/- 1 instead of 2.

I know, I should look on it as an opportunity to excel, carry the team and get lots of experience but many ships really don't suffer being uptiered 2 levels too well and it happens so often it takes a lot of the fun out of the battle for me.

Otherwise, I don't have any real complaints with the current mm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
295 posts
6,288 battles

Personally i think WG should address the +/- 2 issue and only make it +/-1.

I've had a few games where it's mainly heavy on T5 with a light sprinkle of T6 and of course a T7 CV. Enemy had a Saipan which pretty much danced around the map immune while our CV could do little to deal with it. Even the cruisers couldn't do much.

Oh well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240 posts
3,798 battles
2 hours ago, Moldavia said:

...but many ships really don't suffer being uptiered 2 levels too well and it happens so often it takes a lot of the fun out of the battle for me.

I've been playing a fair bit or T8 recently and ... well you get used to being the only T8 in a T10 match as it happens often enough. Sure it's less fun I guess than being alpha dog, and your options for battle contribution are often limited to support roles, and very conservative play generally, but the satisfaction when you do well is higher in proportion, and as you say WG is quite generous with the XP multipler on bottom tier ships. ..

And back at T5-7, being a T5 doesn't phase me in the slightest. I just dial back the aggressiveness proportionate to the anticipated threat level.

So no, I wouldn't want to see the end of the T,T+1,T+2 battle bracketing.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
256 posts
22,160 battles

The MM will match Tiers and Types, not Nations (and variations of ships of the same tier and type within the same nation). The diversity is sufficient.

Mirror MM is an improvement on the status quo. I'd prefer they now reduce the range from +/-2 to +/-1.

If we did have skill based MM, a huge number of players would never get cues on what they're doing wrong or be driven to improve as their team will statistically always have better players to carry them to a win.
Additionally since it effectively caps your potential win rate, super unciums and other skilled players will be incentivized focus more heavily on their individual performance and damage numbers and not in dragging their team to  a win (individual games don't matter to most of these players, its the bigger stats view that matters).

The last thing this game needs is more self serving behavior from fishing divisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
129 posts

this new MM is practically BETTER than before....

 

my team vs enemy

a T6 leander vs Fiji

a T6 La Glass vs Pensacola

 

or on another match

 

a single t6 Russian DD vs Lo Yang and akatsuki and + 1 T5 BB << best bullsheet ever (in exchange we got new orlean (againts 1 T5 BB), Algerie (me) and enemy have Cleveland)

 

obviously this result loss on my team....

 

JUST SAME TYPE and SAME TIER IS GUT ENOUGH!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,888 posts
7,426 battles
8 hours ago, Rina_Pon said:

Well, what people were asking for, in essence, was for skill-based MM only where it reduced the chance of them losing. i.e. they were upset and grasped whatever appeared to solve their problem (more good players on my team!) without thinking it through to the logical conclusion.

No one complains when the unicum CV is on their team!

Honestly, people never asked for skill based MM. People only ask that all the bad players should go in enemy team. Skill based MM is something like you have in the ranked. It is very competitive and not fun for average playerbase. Anyone who is familiar with high rank or top clan battles, know how boring those matches can be. Even if wargaming introduces that, will have to be a sidegrade of random battles that we have.

Also, mirroring class and tiers are extremely valuable imo. It is not fun for a T6 DD to be facing two T7 DD alone. Which is very common case since MM before 7.4 did not balance DDs. As a DD player, I welcome this change with open arms. Infact this is not much of a change from previous MM. Old MM used to mirror CV, top BB tier and top CA tiers anyway. (It's not ships, only tiers and classes, as other's have pointed out already).

Only thing now WG need to do is stop CV anchoring divisions, and eventually move onto +1/-1 MM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
670 posts
6,381 battles
18 hours ago, Rina_Pon said:

I have three issues with this.

1. It's not what people were asking for. What people were asking for was skill based matchmaking. The problem was not ship asymmetry, e.i. Nelson vs. Colorado, it was skill asymmetry, for example unicum Kaga player vs. noob Kaga player.

2. It's boring. Each team has the same ship roster. Like in Co-op. I want more variety in Random, not less. I'm willing to play a few matches with a handicap (disadvantaged) team lineup because statistics means I'll also get the same number where I have an advantage.

3. This is going to increase wait times considerably, especially for people who play less popular ships. Good luck Belfast. Kami R. Kii. Yubari. Texas. ... Flint? just forget it.

2

Re 1 –As a rule of thumb, people complain when they lose, they are happy when they win. Obviously, 24 players want to win, but only 12 will. There are of course the noobs, but no change to matchmaking changes how they play. And there are the battles where a player feels nothing he does could change the outcome and I would not expect matchmaking can change that.

 

Re 2 – I think you misunderstood. I believe they will simply attempt to match Belfast with another T7 cruiser for 3 minutes, not another Belfast.

 

Re 3 – the matchmaking will try to match the ships by type and tier for 3 minutes, fair enough, that may cause delays if there are not many players in the queue. But at least WG shows they try to do something.

 

I guess the new matchmaking was already active in the public tests, I didn’t notice changes to the “player experience.” After all, it is still PvP online gaming. No matchmaking will change that human element.

 

I think WG aims at making battles fairer, by matching ships per class and tier.

 

At least WG seems to listen and try to do something. That’s a start! Let’s see what this does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
250 posts
11,989 battles

I don't think we need +-1 MM range for the sake of variety, it's challenging to play against ships that has 2 tier higher and you get better as more challenges come by, also ship by design were designed to be able to fight ship that 3 tiers higher (look back in CBT day and you will get it), thus +-2 is sweet and work just fine. Also, do not forget that you have to rebalance every ship to fit inside +-1 MM bracket and you have to remember that premium ship cannot be nerfed directly, +-1 MM will only make OP premium ships being more overpowered and no one want that.  

What is not fine about this +-2 MM is there are different templates that inserted inside +-2 MM formula such as protected MM around T3-T4 that use different formula in which ship from tier 5,6 and 8 are forced to get constantly put it uptiered. Simpler term for this is the ratios between being top, middle, and bottom tier is not exactly 33/33/33 

The solution should be marker that check whether you are in top tier, mid tier or bottom tier in previous game of the day for tier you played. This marker should check and distribute your MM to guarantee you get good distributed MM which should be ratio 33/33/33 as I mentioned. Or remove protected barrier at T3/4 so T5/6/8 getting more distributed as tor tier or mid tier and implement new measurement to protect new player from getting kicked by experienced player.

that's all I could say
+-1 MM isn't an answer 

For SBMM 
this game has no need of that, if you need it badly,  you have to answer so many questions that come afterwards such as
> What is determination factor for "skill based" to be input into MM? 
> How you make sure that "stats" you picked for SBMM cannot be padded and entirely depends on your own skill
> Would you consider SBMM to balance all ships type and tier or just certain type
> Will there be any format you have to put in SBMM
> How long MM take to match it reasonably well balanced?
> Will it work in long term
And so on

My answer is there is no need of it at all due to those factors. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240 posts
3,798 battles

So after playing a few random matches last night after 7.4 came through,

It's ... not much different than before. It's certainly more balanced. There is always the same number of DDs and CAs on each team, with matching tiers, but personally I find it a bit vanilla to have this match after match after match.

I thought it was interesting to sometimes get one team with an extra DD, one team with an extra CA, or even in extreme cases one team with no DD at all. Much like having CVs in game it shakes up the strategy a little. If you don't have a DD on your team for example, you are forced into thinking about how to maximize your advantage in CA firepower. Sometimes you are looking to press an advantage, sometimes you are looking to minimize a handicap, but either way it presents a different strategic puzzle to solve. There are still differences in MM, like who has radar cruisers for example, or who has the gunboats, but they are comparatively less significant.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,888 posts
7,426 battles
19 hours ago, Rina_Pon said:

So after playing a few random matches last night after 7.4 came through,

It's ... not much different than before. It's certainly more balanced. There is always the same number of DDs and CAs on each team, with matching tiers, but personally I find it a bit vanilla to have this match after match after match.

I thought it was interesting to sometimes get one team with an extra DD, one team with an extra CA, or even in extreme cases one team with no DD at all. Much like having CVs in game it shakes up the strategy a little. If you don't have a DD on your team for example, you are forced into thinking about how to maximize your advantage in CA firepower. Sometimes you are looking to press an advantage, sometimes you are looking to minimize a handicap, but either way it presents a different strategic puzzle to solve. There are still differences in MM, like who has radar cruisers for example, or who has the gunboats, but they are comparatively less significant.

 

If you think it through, the strategic variety has nothing to do with balanced MM. And from my experience, which team have radar cruisers or which team have the gunboats are way more important than the tiers themselves. What makes you think that random players will think of something when there's no DD, given the fact that they cannot think straight for much easier condition, i.e. helping the allied DD when he is contesting caps etc.

And like you said, its not much different than before. If WG hadn't told you that there was a change, you probably wouldn't even notice by yourself in a few months, just like most of us.

What you are saying, is something like, lets make a football team with no goal keeper to come up with new strategies, when in reality, the strategy lies among team play around objectives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240 posts
3,798 battles
10 hours ago, icy_phoenix said:

What you are saying, is something like, lets make a football team with no goal keeper ...

I wouldn't be against that once in a while. Or baseball with 5 bases. Basketball with two balls in play simultaneously. ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×