Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
NinoV1

This game NEEDS skill based match making

38 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

6
[TF44]
Member
26 posts
5,129 battles

This games got alot of issues, most i can overlook as just inexperience in design and development. But having no matchmaking is honestly killing any desire i have to play it. I've lost my last 7 games in a row, regardless of my performance, and it's happening every day. I don't know a single human on this planet that enjoys losing all day every day, simply because the developers are too lazy to put any matchmaking in the game to balance the teams. These teams are so poorly matched up the matches are not even close. 

 

Theres literally not a single logical reason against putting it in, like i can't fathom why anyone would be against it. Im at my wits end, i enjoy the gameplay, but every time i boot it up i just don't want to play because i know going into the game, regardless of what i do, im gonna lose.

 

If anyone can think of a reason not to put in skill based matchmaking, by all means enlighten me.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,632
[TLS]
Member
5,309 posts
22,026 battles

The answer is: "Increases waiting times". Seriously. Every 2 months this topic is raised and weegee crap on it. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,122
[-CAT-]
Member
4,150 posts
15,259 battles
43 minutes ago, dejiko_nyo said:

The answer is: "Increases waiting times".

Sometimes, I wonder if this is really the reasoning though.

Edited by S0und_Theif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
719
[GS]
Video Contributor, Beta Tester, Clantest Coordinator
2,910 posts
14,815 battles

if you are looking to fight higher skill play

ranked or clan wars are welcome to you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
80
[REPOI]
Member
147 posts
15,476 battles

I never get this kind of thread

Why do people think they're going to magically start winning if they're matched with players of the same skill, and why is it always players who are average or slightly below/above who have that notion?

Skill based MM does nothing except put outliers from the average (people who are very good and people who are very bad) away from the queue and give them bad loading times.

Clan battles has actual ELO-based MM and it's exactly that. A team's overall winrate over the season is almost directly tied to the member's monthly/2-month winrate. People win or lose almost exactly the same as they would in randoms, where there's no SBMM. The difference is that a 5-minute queuefor a game is considered fast in Hurricane.

Edited by Adorable_Yanfei
  • Cool 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6
[TF44]
Member
26 posts
5,129 battles
40 minutes ago, Adorable_Yanfei said:

I never get this kind of thread

Why do people think they're going to magically start winning if they're matched with players of the same skill, and why is it always players who are average or slightly below/above who have that notion?

Skill based MM does nothing except put outliers from the average (people who are very good and people who are very bad) away from the queue and give them bad loading times.

Clan battles has actual ELO-based MM and it's exactly that. A team's overall winrate over the season is almost directly tied to the member's monthly/2-month winrate. People win or lose almost exactly the same as they would in randoms, where there's no SBMM. The difference is that a 5-minute queuefor a game is considered fast in Hurricane.

Its not even just so i can win, the games aren't even close. Its literally people who have no idea what they're doing versing people who are organised and skilled. I don't mind losing, but blowout after blowout is straight up unenjoyable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
963
[SMOKE]
Member
3,030 posts
19,497 battles

And how do the game measure skill ... each and every type of ships , and even individual ships among the same type could be good at specific and not good at specific , but what does this game really looks for ... DAMAGE DEALING and only ever major .. damage dealing .. before even considering a skill based MM , one had to come up with a meaningful and working measurement for the skill part itself and not just damage dealing.

Its no secret we want it implemented but before that , the reward and measure of effort , how they reflect in score , EXP etc must had a radical and total revamp which actually honor true effort and skill displayed towards winning a game and / or towards team play , and how about the effort and team play for losing teams , defense is not an easy task especially when a team is shorthanded , should we not measure & recognize the skill and effort thus displayed under such handicapped situation ...

For the part this game lack any real skill based measuring mean nor recognize them most ...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
641
[LNA]
Member
2,185 posts
16,374 battles

No one stop you from slugging it out in rank and clan battle. That's where you test your mettle, not the forum.

Problem solved sir.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50
[SALT]
Member
116 posts
3,796 battles

Never play in ranked though. The real battle is in CB. Random battle as it's sounds is random of course.

WR sometimes doesn't matter, the matter is PR. Ask your friend or clanmate to create a div when you have 2-3 lose streaks.

Ranked is good if you only aiming for the prize, random battle is good when good teammates on your side, CB is real battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
278
[SEARN]
[SEARN]
Beta Tester
671 posts
21,139 battles

If you want to play with similarly skilled people.
Join a CLAN that does CB regularly.
And hope you can qualify.
RANDOM is just that .. random.
They get as much cr4p team mates as you do.
When you're winning in random those guys on the otherside are also complaining of their team mates being cr4p and vice versa when it's your turn to be on the losing side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,928
[151ST]
Member
3,975 posts
13,076 battles
11 hours ago, S0und_Theif said:

Sometimes, I wonder if this is really the reasoning though.

Literally wait times.

And MM struggles at certain times of day as is...

Or so their thinking goes, I know a couple of coders who look at the whole issue as a coding challenge however...

But how complicated do WG want to make their MM algorithm is probably a second order question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23
[151ST]
Member
22 posts
4,918 battles

Some thoughts...

So what do people really want?

  • Battles with and against people of similar “skill level”?  If so play Ranked.
  • Battles with people who understand teamwork and will work together?  If so play Clan Battles, or at least div-up.
  • An even distribution of “skill” between the two sides of a random battle?
  • An even distribution of detailed ship “special abilities” (e.g. Radar Cruisers, or specific sub-types - super-cruisers | heavy cruisers | light cruisers, torpedo DDs | gunboat DDs) between the two sides of a random battle?

Ignoring the first two - as they already have solutions - what about the last two?

An even distribution of skill.  One of the things people are reacting is battles where one side appears to have more “skilled” players than the other, and it appears it would be possible within the bounds of the 24 players selected for the match to deliver more “balanced” teams by swapping one or two ships between the two teams, without creating any further match making delay.  (From a coding perspective this looks to me like a simple optimisation that uses successive pair-wise swaps that says “If I swap these two players do I get more equal teams”).  BUT how do you define “skill”?  This links to a previous thread on the most important stat for “stat-shaming”, is it overall WR, ship WR, all time WR, or WR within the last month or 100 games?  This question is the critical one.

On the “special abilities” or sub-types question the stock answer is that the individual ships have “balans” at their tier to compensate for the presence or absence of special abilities.  Without access to the sort of data WG has on the comparative win rate of “balanced” matches between teams with and without radar for example it is not possible to see how true this is.  It might be possible to look at the same sort of pair wise swaps within current matches that could help with this issue, but it would be hard to do this for a large number of factors at the same time without needing to go back to the basic matchmaking search that generates the 24 person match.  We will get some insight into the impact of additional complexity in matchmaking when subs come out, taking us to 5 ship types and up to 3 tiers within which the MM is attempting to find a solution - does this lead to less “balanced” matches, or longer wait times for battle?

So “tell me what you want, what you really really want...”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,632
[TLS]
Member
5,309 posts
22,026 battles

I love it when purple divs in OP steel/rubbish ships cannot even save their team because their team potats more than the opposing potato team. Hmm... that is a good idea. Best players and worst players should be put on one team so that it averages out. 

What people want is a system where "fair dinkum" applies and the player is playing within their level rather than the "amerika bullies defenseless countries" system. What is happening now is the system is taking the worst of everything and using it. Being on either side of a steamroll is no fun. Being the steamroller you learn nothing from the match. Being on the steamrolled you wonder why you are putting so much effort in a lost game and wasting your time instead of just scuttling your ship and moving to the next game. As I have said before, the current situation is akin to Liverpoo playing Mom&Pop's Pub FC everytime and beating the snot out of them. 

If people truly want random, then there should be no divs, no tier restrictions (when was it last T2 vs T10?), no ship restrictions, no skill restrictions. I think random lovers would enjoy that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
385
[KNCOL]
Member
435 posts
7,647 battles
14 hours ago, NinoV1 said:

Its not even just so i can win, the games aren't even close. Its literally people who have no idea what they're doing versing people who are organised and skilled. I don't mind losing, but blowout after blowout is straight up unenjoyable.

So play Ranked then, it's basically skilled MM. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,632
[TLS]
Member
5,309 posts
22,026 battles
21 minutes ago, Ryuuoh_DeltaPlus said:

So play Ranked then, it's basically skilled MM. 

"supposedly" is a better word as people have demonstrated that you can bruteforce the system to another rank. 

Hmm... Another good idea. Each tier has their own ranked rather than the current one tier only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
69
[XSA]
Super Tester_
197 posts
9,877 battles
17 hours ago, dejiko_nyo said:

The answer is: "Increases waiting times".

That, and if you think of it deeply it is a valid reason.

1 hour ago, Ryuuoh_DeltaPlus said:

So play Ranked then, it's basically skilled MM. 

Anyone who had play ranked would know that this is a lie, there is no skilled MM in Ranked.

 

To OP: @NinoV1

If you are talking about Ranked Battles, please kindly read my proposal and give me your thoughts (or maybe cast your vote), there are ways to improve the ranked system without implementing a "real skill-based MM".

For Random battles, it is how it is. No one enjoys losing, meanwhile if someone is winning, somebody's gotta lose. While there are days you would have been losing in a streak, there are days you would have been winning in a streak. If the "skill-based MM" really exist, the expected win rate of all players would be pretty equal, since they always play against players who are similar to their skills (which means both team's chances of winning is kinda equal), then it suddenly turns out you'll feel like playing in a competitive game mode, while Random Battles are meant to be rather casual.

Currently, everyone is under the same matchmaking system, no one can pay to win every match, while the win rate for each player account playing solo (assumed battle count 1000+) could vary from 30-ish% to 60-ish%, surely skills play in a big role, all you could do is to improve yourself and hope to move up the sector.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
963
[SMOKE]
Member
3,030 posts
19,497 battles
4 hours ago, dejiko_nyo said:

....

If people truly want random, then there should be no divs, no tier restrictions (when was it last T2 vs T10?), no ship restrictions, no skill restrictions. I think random lovers would enjoy that.

This should be made as a regular but special game  mode  ... serious , not joking here , there is some merit in this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
963
[SMOKE]
Member
3,030 posts
19,497 battles
3 hours ago, Ryuuoh_DeltaPlus said:

So play Ranked then, it's basically skilled MM. 

 

NO it is not, just take a look at this season's , especially Bronze when one team can had Atlanta and Belfast, and the other team none .. care to balance out the non counter-able Radar coverage , Or we had Silver , and then one side got Super Cruiser and the other side basically balanced with a Royal Navy CL .. and we can had this with multiple iteration and variation. with only 7 vs 7 the difference shown in matching both skill ( not there ) and capability / capacity ships hold are way skewed far more than 12 vs 12 in Random

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
871
[BLESS]
Member
1,569 posts
13,794 battles
22 hours ago, NinoV1 said:

 I've lost my last 7 games in a row, regardless of my performance, and it's happening every day.

It's statistically impossible for you to play better than average and lose more than 50% of your random games. If your WR is below 50% it means your performance sucks, no argument possible. Even if you happen to be getting a decent PR in that ship, it still means you are incapable of telling the difference between what you could be doing do from what you should be doing re. map control and game influence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,122
[-CAT-]
Member
4,150 posts
15,259 battles
13 hours ago, S4pp3R said:

Literally wait times.

And MM struggles at certain times of day as is...

Or so their thinking goes, I know a couple of coders who look at the whole issue as a coding challenge however...

But how complicated do WG want to make their MM algorithm is probably a second order question.

Glad to hear that there are coders looking at the MM.

 

It's quite difficult to trust WG's word.

Since they tend to change narrative when they seem fit.

 

I'm greatful that there are people (coders) looking into WG's game.

To keep them in check.

 

With that in mind, WG should really take care of their players. New and old.

But that's on another topic.

 

Thanks mate for the info. :Smile_medal:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
278
[SEARN]
[SEARN]
Beta Tester
671 posts
21,139 battles
7 hours ago, Mechfori said:

NO it is not, just take a look at this season's , especially Bronze when one team can had Atlanta and Belfast, and the other team none .. care to balance out the non counter-able Radar coverage , Or we had Silver , and then one side got Super Cruiser and the other side basically balanced with a Royal Navy CL .. and we can had this with multiple iteration and variation. with only 7 vs 7 the difference shown in matching both skill ( not there ) and capability / capacity ships hold are way skewed far more than 12 vs 12 in Random

In Bronze at this stage in Ranked sprint? with who's left there.
The one's sailing those ships are more of a liability than a boon.
Those ships go BOOM quite fast, specially the Atlanta.
The Belfast don't fare well either.
When I see them on the RED side, I smile and say it's going to be a good round for us.
It's all about the DD. Who's got the better DD pilot wins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
963
[SMOKE]
Member
3,030 posts
19,497 battles
1 hour ago, iDd_Sloth said:

In Bronze at this stage in Ranked sprint? with who's left there.
The one's sailing those ships are more of a liability than a boon.
Those ships go BOOM quite fast, specially the Atlanta.
The Belfast don't fare well either.
When I see them on the RED side, I smile and say it's going to be a good round for us.
It's all about the DD. Who's got the better DD pilot wins.

well the discussion is not about the Ranked battle itself, but does it really reflect measuring skill as per RANKED .. and the scenario set out is just how the Ranked MM create by spec handicapped or advantaged team , thus reducing the equality or negate it .. making any so call measure of skill as per result of such game questionable .. for both winning and losing side , we just had a new Ranked per this new patch and we will had to see how it goes , even WG likely know about the Caveat Emptor involved , still single tier only take care of some but not the others , the whole Ranked system, if wanting to be really competitive based ; will need some further and might be even major revamp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
278
[SEARN]
[SEARN]
Beta Tester
671 posts
21,139 battles
34 minutes ago, Mechfori said:

well the discussion is not about the Ranked battle itself, but does it really reflect measuring skill as per RANKED .. and the scenario set out is just how the Ranked MM create by spec handicapped or advantaged team , thus reducing the equality or negate it .. making any so call measure of skill as per result of such game questionable .. for both winning and losing side , we just had a new Ranked per this new patch and we will had to see how it goes , even WG likely know about the Caveat Emptor involved , still single tier only take care of some but not the others , the whole Ranked system, if wanting to be really competitive based ; will need some further and might be even major revamp

It was in response for you equating that the battle is loopsided because of the ships involved. Stating about the unequal distribution of ships with radar or super cruisers per side.
I was just stating it that it's about the player behind the ship. You put a potato on a super cruiser doesn't make him unstoppable, he'll still be the same potato doing potato stuff.
RANKED MM doesn't take into account what skill level you have nor how high you are in the given rank system. Heck! Rank 10 are pitted against Rank 2 or Rank 3.
It was supposed to weed out the undesirables until you reach the GOLD ranked at rank 1. That is what it was supposed to do but somehow some baggage players do managed to get carried over due to pure luck.
The way WG  measures your skill right now is about damage done + ships sank and W/R. While spotting + damaged tanked has little to no effect.
Much more with positioning, maneuvers and battle plan of which can't be quantified. And even with this given metric that they do have right now, WG doesn't implement skill based MM.
They opted to go with weeding out in ranked.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
963
[SMOKE]
Member
3,030 posts
19,497 battles
4 hours ago, iDd_Sloth said:

...

WG doesn't implement skill based MM.
They opted to go with weeding out in ranked.

And that is the main point , the whole MM, whether its Random , or Ranked , really does not reflect skill based approach , nor much of the game mechanics , reward , and so

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×