Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
keskparane

MM Rant

80 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
2,222 posts
13,723 battles

For a month now (literally 30 days) I have had unfair MM. I'm not talking about ships but skill levels. I know this because I monitor them.

So basically what has happened is for the last month I have played the majority of my battles against better teams.

Usually 3 minutes into the match it's 12 v 10.

When I have finally gotten some good players on the team they have yoloed. (It's like they have looked at the match up and decided not to play)

I just need to rant about is all. I know it will eventually turn around but it's really draining when you get such a long run.

I can only dream of a day when MM will make some sort of skill comparison and the matches will not be so one sided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
2,222 posts
13,723 battles

P.S Scharnhorst is on sale today, 50% off. It's things like the MM I have mentioned that I use to convince myself not to spend any more money on boats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
323 posts
4,086 battles
3 hours ago, keskparane said:

I can only dream of a day when MM will make some sort of skill comparison and the matches will not be so one sided.

Yes exactly! Why WG doesn't make such system? I mean yes there are no technologies to do that but i really hope they will sometimes in the future. Having an enemy team who has better skills are utterly unfair. Just think about it, if the majority of my teams are just decent players and the enemy teams are mostly pros, who have bigger efforts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
358 posts
7,415 battles
43 minutes ago, mr_glitchy_R said:

Yes exactly! Why WG doesn't make such system?

There are more players with bad statistics than good which would increase the queue time for players of higher skill and when you follow that through to it's logical conclusion the higher the skill level the longer the queue time.

 

46 minutes ago, mr_glitchy_R said:

I mean yes there are no technologies to do that but i really hope they will sometimes in the future.

Statistically when flipping a coin you are more likely to land a head than a tail (51 times out of 100). If you are playing against players of equal skill then you would probably see the same statistical outcome, a near 50% W/R over X amount of games.

 

49 minutes ago, mr_glitchy_R said:

Having an enemy team who has better skills are utterly unfair.

Play golf, you get a handicap. Of course that doesn't stop a better golfer from having a good game it just means that players of less skill can feel better about their score at the end of the course.

Real estate agents get commissions for sales, those that sell more homes earn better commissions would it be fair for agents to not get paid commensurate to their results for the sake of those that perform poorly?

I'm pretty sure I could find other examples where those who perform well are rewarded proportionally to their effort.

 

52 minutes ago, mr_glitchy_R said:

Just think about it, if the majority of my teams are just decent players and the enemy teams are mostly pros, who have bigger efforts?

The same goes for equally skilled players, they would balance out and all would eventually have a near 50% W/R. How do you determine who is a better player and how do you prevent players skill metrics from averaging out towards the 50% region?

If you based it on damage dealt it might prevent it but I suspect the games would turn out more like ranked matches where everyone camps. Then players that normally manage to pull big number games no longer pull such big numbers and are placed in games where everyone pulls similar low numbers. Eventually good players would yo yo between big number games and low number games as their skill would see them club when dropping back down to low damage games.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1
[BLUMR]
[BLUMR]
Member
5 posts
4,573 battles
3 hours ago, Epicurus_ said:

There are more players with bad statistics than good which would increase the queue time for players of higher skill and when you follow that through to it's logical conclusion the higher the skill level the longer the queue time.

 

I have a feeling that what people mean by this system is to have equal numbers of skilled players per team, not pros against pros and  potatoes against potatoes.
For example if MM que consists of the following.
5x people with a W/R of 60%+
10x people with a W/R of 50%+
7x people with a W/R of -50%

The teams would then be divided equally so that each team gets 4, 5, 3 people of each skill lvl and the remaining will continue in the next que but then be prioritized.
I honestly would not mind having to wait longer for a game if this was to happen as I know the game would then be a better quality of game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1
[BLUMR]
[BLUMR]
Member
5 posts
4,573 battles

Also like to mention before someone says something, I do understand Win Ratio is no way to judge a person on there skill lvl hek some of the top players of this game are on 50 something %. Instead of this  WG could introduce a system that they already have in a way. Calculate base XP earned over a number of battles, lets say 50 then every battle on that it then also recalculates over a 50 battle window.
For example I will use my battle counter, lets say this system gets introduced right when I have my 4000th battle. Every game I have up until 4050 my base XP is then added up and over the 50 battles is divided into a skill ratio of sorts.
Once I then have my 4051 battle that would then replace the stats of the 4001 whether I did better or not it then gets recalculated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
2,222 posts
13,723 battles
9 hours ago, mr_glitchy_R said:

Yes exactly! Why WG doesn't make such system? I mean yes there are no technologies to do that but i really hope they will sometimes in the future. Having an enemy team who has better skills are utterly unfair. Just think about it, if the majority of my teams are just decent players and the enemy teams are mostly pros, who have bigger efforts?

Did you mean to say there are no technologies to do that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
2,222 posts
13,723 battles

@Epicurus_ I understand your points. I have considered those points myself for many months already. However I believe that overall there is potential for a little more balance to prevent long runs of winning or losing. It's very disheartening (and lets not forget the slowed xp/credit grind) when you are on a long losing streak. When these streaks are caused simply because of a random imbalance I believe it hurts the game. And look at it this way, if everyone did get closer to 50% it wouldn't make it any different than it is now, however I don't believe that will happen.

Thinking as I type I am wondering if some sort of weighted system towards a balanced team as your wr decreases would work. So basically it could stay with the normal MM while your WR doesn't fluctuate too much. If you start to go on a steep increase/decrease then it could put you into more balanced teams for a while.

Consider this from the perspective of challenges. If you have 3 days to complete a (win x number of battles) challenge and get totally screwed by MM I think that's not right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
239 posts
13,995 battles

What you/we need to do is to collect data. I believe there is a mod/addon that does pull player infomation/statistics but is it quite unfriendly to export the needed data (ie, dump it into a file rather than copying everything by hand).

However, I do believe that rather than you being lumped with a bad set of players, it's more likely that that your team cannot situationally adapt. More often than not, I see ship classes just shooting at near max range and contributing very little. This very bad habit has carried over to coop to the point that I can tell that the player has been playing mostly random and has not adapted to the change in playstyle.

Also, the fixation people have on their WR/WTR isn't helping either. Both are terrible measurement metrics. WTR isn't that good because it assumes that only by dealing damage you contribute towards the game. Base xp (without premium multiplier) may be the way to go but the weightings for different classes shouldn't be the same.

Edited by dejiko_nyo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
97
[LYNMF]
Member
991 posts
11,618 battles

sad to say game as now it's really bad

i have played T9 T10 match that lasted less than 10 minutes, unbelievable one side can be so bad get stomp over so quickly

even if we blame WG doing this doing that i think players is the biggest headache of all, everyday i would see something truly mad with how players plays this game

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SIF]
Super Tester
3,840 posts
4,138 battles
1 hour ago, ahwai82 said:

sad to say game as now it's really bad

i have played T9 T10 match that lasted less than 10 minutes, unbelievable one side can be so bad get stomp over so quickly

even if we blame WG doing this doing that i think players is the biggest headache of all, everyday i would see something truly mad with how players plays this game

 

The problem is that this region culturally has the belief that the most important part of the game is to own the T10 ships and not too worried about the skill levels needed to play at that level

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,347 posts
8,872 battles
7 hours ago, dejiko_nyo said:

Also, the fixation people have on their WR/WTR isn't helping either. Both are terrible measurement metrics. WTR isn't that good because it assumes that only by dealing damage you contribute towards the game. Base xp (without premium multiplier) may be the way to go but the weightings for different classes shouldn't be the same.

Totally agree.

WTR is a horrible metric because it emphasises damage and kills way too much. I believe it is 50% average damage, 30% kills and a mere 20% winrate.

Base xp would be a more useful metric but some tweaks are needed - even this I feel gives too much emphasis on damage and not enough for supportive actions like spotting or potential damage. All too often I see some BBs sniping from the back the entire game on nearly full health, letting their team get wrecked, pushing out when they are the only ones left and sinking 2-3 low health enemies before finally going down themselves and getting high xp rewards for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
239 posts
13,995 battles
1 hour ago, Thyaliad said:

Totally agree.

WTR is a horrible metric because it emphasises damage and kills way too much. I believe it is 50% average damage, 30% kills and a mere 20% winrate.

Base xp would be a more useful metric but some tweaks are needed - even this I feel gives too much emphasis on damage and not enough for supportive actions like spotting or potential damage. All too often I see some BBs sniping from the back the entire game on nearly full health, letting their team get wrecked, pushing out when they are the only ones left and sinking 2-3 low health enemies before finally going down themselves and getting high xp rewards for it.

Hence the weightings. Like spotting is more valuable in a dd, taking damage for a bb. At least people get rewarded for playing their role.

I do believe it is taken into consideration in the XP given out as I have had matches where I barely caused any damage but did spotting/capping/dumping torpedoes from the flanks in my dd whilst ending up 6/7th.

Edited by dejiko_nyo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
218 posts
11,604 battles

3 times doing ultimate frontier with randoms from op of the week and all three times aerodrome got obliterated early. I think i have better chance of winning in randoms :cap_fainting:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SIF]
Super Tester
3,840 posts
4,138 battles
14 minutes ago, Lowyat said:

3 times doing ultimate frontier with randoms from op of the week and all three times aerodrome got obliterated early. I think i have better chance of winning in randoms :cap_fainting:

This scenario is horrendous.

So many people cant grasp the tactics and the rest insist on bringing useless DD's into it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
239 posts
13,995 battles

Ultimate Frontier is all about teamwork with the right ships. I got one where there was 0 bbs, 4 cruisers and 3 dds. Guess how it ended.

On paper it looks dds are good initially, but you are screwed at the end because you cannot tank torpedoes. And huge firefests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HKACC]
Member
252 posts
2,830 battles

This kind of thread is why I never grinding more than T7. Until all nations tree branch reach T7 (50% done), I wouldn't want to touch T8-T10 matches. :Smile_hiding:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,347 posts
8,872 battles

DDs like Gadjah Mada and Akatsuki are actually alright in Ultimate Frontier, as long as there aren't more than 1-2 DDs in a team. In fact my last 2 5-stars were in the Gadjah Mada, topped the scoreboard too in both cases.

The problem with this op is that teams must know what they are doing, but unfortunately this is seldom the case. I have seen BBs ignoring the Atlanta spawn, players yoloing into the Raptor and dying, or just outright not shooting at the targets ships being attacked by the aerodrome. That last one really infuriates me. There is a big honking crosshair above the target ship, yet people would rather shoot the enemy right beside it. So many times the team losses a star needlessly because players for some reason just refuse to shoot the designated ship. :Smile-angry:

Edited by Thyaliad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,016 posts
7,490 battles
On 7/21/2018 at 2:19 AM, keskparane said:

Usually 3 minutes into the match it's 12 v 10

Haha, you must have been on my team, then?

I think a lot is perception. There was a time when I thought I am "always" bottom tier. So I started a list where I noted the match tier and my tier. As that list got longer, I saw that everything was fairly well distributed, within 5 or 10 per cent. So it was only my perception that I was "always bottom tier" when I fact it was not so.

Now you could note the player names for both teams, then look up whatever you think is a fair measure of skill. See what you find. I think you will find that as you do this, you find the MM is fairly "fair".

I think you have to learn to deal with the MM or stop playing the game. It's that easy. If the game causes you primarily frustration, stop playing.

Since I started playing the game, everybody complains about the same things. The noobs, the matchmaking, WG making money. And of course, players complain when they experience a string of losses. I have not seen players complain about a string of wins, because the MM is unfair on the other team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×