Liberty75

Hopefully Strict Template MM Will Die Soon

92 posts in this topic

6 hours ago, 8_Hussars said:

It's got nothing to do with propaganda/marketing and everything to do with apathy.

Notwithstanding, that empirically most pre-9.18 MM complaints were about the a 6/6/3 tier structure on one team with a 4/6/5 on the other; exacerbated by a tank role imbalance of 6 top tier heavies vs 4 top tier TDs.  Which to be fair post 9.18 MM addresses nicely.  So to say its "inferior" is misleading as both MM's pump out matches, arguably some more balanced and some with more variety.

At this point MM is only different in a Coke/Pepsi, Ford/Chev, iPhone/Android kind of way...  when we press battle MM puts us in one.   We can argue which characteristics are better between each, but ultimately they serve their purpose as we have a drink, a vehicle and a phone and its a personal value decision (not necessarily data driven) which one we like more.  

Ultimately, not every player values the differing MM characteristics equally or consistently (top tier/bottom tier, tier templates, tank role imbalance, ability to contribute, MM time, etc).  Regardless of data provided, there are lots of players that dislike the current MM, there are lots that like the current MM, and some that just dont care either way.

Frankly, to keep going on categorically like the points have been made, accepted as the only correct view, and players are idiots not to recognize "the truth", diminishes the debate and leads to undermining all the (mostly open minded) work and effort put into the issue so far.

"Seriously, this is some great MM variety" said no player ever. ;-)

At this point most find it baffling how much we moan on about it...

I said, " inferior on so many levels." I didn't say on every level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Liberty75 said:

I said, " inferior on so many levels." I didn't say on every level.

Nor did I allude you did, but let's not stoop to (official forum) semantics and spelling... the broad generalizations and indictments do you no credit and the arguments you have put forward elsewhere deserve better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, 8_Hussars said:

Nor did I allude you did, but let's not stoop to (official forum) semantics and spelling... the broad generalizations and indictments do you no credit and the arguments you have put forward elsewhere deserve better.

I mistook the tone of your response and I was reacting to it. My apologies. Perhaps we can both learn to communicate more diplomatically in the future.

As for the main topic, MM differences, the positive changes that were made to the current MM could have been implemented in the old system while retaining most of the positive aspects of the old system as well. The move to a strict template system was unnecessary and detrimental to the community as a whole. If we make a comparison checklist of positive characteristics between the previous dynamic system and the current static system, the old system would prevail. That was the main point I was essentially making.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Liberty75 I didn't phrase any of that very well. Did you already post a statiscal breakdown of the number each tier seen before and after the change? I would think that you'd actually see more same tier tanks now than before...

In any event, it's a legitimately hard problem to solve because a person can't be top tier without other people being bottom tier. Likewise, you can't just track individual players and make sure everyone gets the same ratio. That's impractical from an implementation standpoint. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, monjardin said:

@Liberty75 I didn't phrase any of that very well. Did you already post a statiscal breakdown of the number each tier seen before and after the change? I would think that you'd actually see more same tier tanks now than before...

In any event, it's a legitimately hard problem to solve because a person can't be top tier without other people being bottom tier. Likewise, you can't just track individual players and make sure everyone gets the same ratio. That's impractical from an implementation standpoint. 

Over time you see a general trend. I looked at 200 of my own games and also 200 of a friend of mine. He had more top tier games than me and I had more middle tier games than him. There were a few things that remained constant. For both of us, the worst matches we had in those 200 games was being in a group of 3 tanks at the bottom in only 3 games each. There were no single tank or two tank bottom tier games for either of us in those 400 games. Now obviously sooner or later it would happen since someone has to be the single tank. I'd guess that it happened very rarely, but it obviously did happen. Getting a consistent mess like we have now to avoid battles that rarely occurred is a bad deal. Also, my friend was bottom tier 28% of the time and I was bottom tier 29% of the time. Recently a player from the EU posted only his tier 8 matches, and he was bottom tier 25% of the time.

The information that has been gathered so far is pretty consistent that players were bottom tier less than 30% of the time and when they were, a great deal of those matches had a decent spread of tanks between top, middle, and bottom. So while some information will be a little different from player to player depending on when they played and what they played, measurable trends are identifiable and measurable.

This all started when people kept telling me on the forums how happy they were to not be a single tank at the bottom anymore (essentially parroting WG's marketing). I recalled some bad matches, but these players seemed to be exaggerating so I went to see how bad it actually was. Maybe I was wrong? What I found surprised me. Bottom tier was was even better than I remembered it. I guess our memories play tricks on us. Once I gathered enough information I started to expose my findings. It looks like WG hasn't been completely forthcoming on why they changed the MM, or they just screwed up and are unlikely to admit it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/10/2017 at 7:18 AM, Liberty75 said:

Tiers 4 to 8, the chief grinding tiers, are the worst to play in now.

Simply not true. Haven't played below tier 6 in ages. But I play tiers 6 and 7 for fun post 9.18 all the time. 3/5/7 MM has helped these tiers immensely. Tier 9 MM remains awesome. Tier 10 is tougher than ever with so many single tier matches. But if you want to play with the big boys... Yes, tier 8 is awful. But that's only 1 of the top five tiers, so...

 

23 hours ago, Liberty75 said:

 

It is inferior on so many levels that it baffles me why people claim to like it... then I remember and respect the power propaganda/marketing has over people. :ohgod:

 

So anyone who disagrees with you is just a stooge for the man? This discussion is getting seriously tedious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, sohojacques said:

Yes, tier 8 is awful. But that's only 1 of the top five tiers, so...

The most popular tier is broken.The MM is broken. The most expensive tier of premium tanks sold by WG is a mess. There are A LOT of unhappy customers out there.

Also, EVERY tier suffers from the same boring strict template system. You might enjoy VERY repetitive gameplay, but there are many players that would rather have more variety.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 minute ago, Liberty75 said:

EVERY tier suffers

Bullshit. Tell that to the people actually grinding up a line. It has got much easier to do so if you are half competent. It's not just about being bottom tier more often, as you go on about again, and again, and again, and... It's also about what you have to face when bottom tier. Only 3 2+MM tanks, with those spots often taken up by arty, TDs, and LTs makes grinding most tiers less frustrating for more players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sohojacques said:

 

Bullshit. Tell that to the people actually grinding up a line. It has got much easier to do so if you are half competent. It's not just about being bottom tier more often, as you go on about again, and again, and again, and... It's also about what you have to face when bottom tier. Only 3 2+MM tanks, with those spots often taken up by arty, TDs, and LTs makes grinding most tiers less frustrating for more players.

Actually, I go on and on about variety. Bottom tier is just a dull fact. In the old MM you didn't face bad teams most of the time as a bottom tier tank, and the bulk of your games were top and middle tier. I'd say that is much better than 60% of your games being bottom tier now. Face it. The old system gave a good spread of top, middle, and bottom tier matches and a good spread of tanks in those matches. The old system also had much more variety! Something this current system lacks. That isn't bullshit, it is reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of lacking variety, just went on about being bottom tier more often again. The reality is that Wargaming broke MM when they flooded tier 8 with OP premiums. I doubt they can ever really fix it. Tiers 6 and 7 are easier to grind post 9.18. Tier 8 isn't. Those OP premiums everyone bought aren't as OP anymore. That's it. End of discussion. If you find the game boring/lacking in variety, why do you still play it? Move on. It's just one of many entertainment options out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, sohojacques said:

Speaking of lacking variety, just went on about being bottom tier more often again. The reality is that Wargaming broke MM when they flooded tier 8 with OP premiums. I doubt they can ever really fix it. Tiers 6 and 7 are easier to grind post 9.18. Tier 8 isn't. Those OP premiums everyone bought aren't as OP anymore. That's it. End of discussion. If you find the game boring/lacking in variety, why do you still play it? Move on. It's just one of many entertainment options out there.

Sorry, not end of discussion. This new MM brutalizes new players, even in tiers 6 and 7. And most players have an easier time grinding when they are top or middle tier. Do you deny that top and middle tier are better than bottom? Combined with the fact that the old MM gave a good spread of tanks in most bottom tier battles, that left only a small fraction of a player's battles that were challenging. So to avoid 5 or 6 challenging battles out of 100, we get a dull predictable system that sucks the life and variety right out of this game. Great trade-off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Liberty75

OK, I definitely didn't get my point across. It doesn't matter if you are top tier less as long as you have more same tier opponents on average. You can no longer see more than 3 tanks two tiers higher. That was not previously the case. 

I tracked a large number of personal games and plotted a histogram of the tiers faced. Same tier tanks dwarfed everything else. 

If fact, I'd say that power creep has hurt traditional tier 8 credit grinders much more than the MM change. It used to be that the only thing I really had to worry about in the KV-5 was running into an E75. Now there are Defenders, Skorpion G, Mauschen, Strv S1, Chryslers, VK100, etc, etc. 

Additionally, regular tier 8 was brutal ever since they dropped battle tier 12. If anything, the new MM may be helping non-pref tier 8 on the low-pop NA server at least. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

49 minutes ago, monjardin said:

Same tier tanks dwarfed everything else. 

What monjardin said^. It's much easier to be bottom tier now, except at tier 8. But that is at least as much a tank balance issue as it is a MM one, cause of the massive performance gap between tiers 8 and 9.

Edited by sohojacques
clarity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, monjardin said:

@Liberty75

OK, I definitely didn't get my point across. It doesn't matter if you are top tier less as long as you have more same tier opponents on average. You can no longer see more than 3 tanks two tiers higher. That was not previously the case. 

I tracked a large number of personal games and plotted a histogram of the tiers faced. Same tier tanks dwarfed everything else. 

If fact, I'd say that power creep has hurt traditional tier 8 credit grinders much more than the MM change. It used to be that the only thing I really had to worry about in the KV-5 was running into an E75. Now there are Defenders, Skorpion G, Mauschen, Strv S1, Chryslers, VK100, etc, etc. 

Additionally, regular tier 8 was brutal ever since they dropped battle tier 12. If anything, the new MM may be helping non-pref tier 8 on the low-pop NA server at least. 

Just a word about my writing style: when I rant about the MM, I am not attacking you. I am attacking a poorly thought out game mechanic by WG. You and everyone else here are probably good people and we're just having, what I hope is, a constructive conversation. My tone is my own defect.

For me, it isn't just getting more bottom tier tanks to share my misery. It is about a few factors, including getting the same dull format over and over. It isn't exciting. It is predictably dumb and really makes moving up these tiers a real mental grind.

Our level in the match does matter too. Being bottom tier, no matter how many tanks are with you, is still bottom tier. Halfway intelligent top tier players farm the hell out of the bottom tier tanks (as they should!). Bottom tiers are easy to penetrate and top tiers can quickly remove these guns from the fight. Just because there are 7 and we are one of them doesn't make it any better. It just ensures that the top and middle tier tanks always have targets.

As a bottom tier tank, you're basically food. Just because there is more food at the bottom now doesn't really help the food. It helps the feasters at the top.

The ideal situation, with the whole population being considered here, would be to return to a format similar to the previous version, but to include the balancing factors (such as the same amount of tanks per tier, etc.) of the current version. Players would have a more exciting game if they were to move freely and unpredictably between being top, middle, and bottom tier. Each level has its own challenges and play styles. On top of that, team makeup should also be unpredictable (from how many top, middle, and bottom tier tanks are on each team). This also creates another level of excitement for what is otherwise a very repetitive game.

6 hours ago, sohojacques said:

 

What monjardin said^. It's much easier to be bottom tier now, except at tier 8. But that is at least as much a tank balance issue as it is a MM one, cause of the massive performance gap between tiers 8 and 9.

IT IS easier to be bottom tier now. The rub is that now we are bottom tier TWICE as many times, so any advantage gained at being bottom tier is lost since you are bottom tier much more now. At best, someone can claim that it is a wash (which it isn't even that). Couple that with a boring strict template system (huge loss in variety!) and this new MM is a failure. As a failure, I mean it wasn't an improvement in the game. It was a net loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Liberty75

It was not my intent to personally attack you, and I definitely didn't get offended by your arguments in any way. We just have a subjective difference of opinion in the topic.

I have a personal preference for single tier matches (i.e. 15 tier 10 tanks on each side). If you don't like those sorts of matchups, then the new MM is probably less enjoyable for you. 

I'll agree to disagree. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Liberty75 said:

The move to a strict template system was unnecessary and detrimental to the community as a whole. If we make a comparison checklist of positive characteristics between the previous dynamic system and the current static system, the old system would prevail. That was the main point I was essentially making.

Notwithstanding, that empirically most pre-9.18 MM complaints were about a 6/6/3 tier structure on one team with a 4/6/5 on the other; exacerbated by a tank role imbalance of 6 top tier heavies vs 4 top tier TDs.  (This may well be wrong but its what I am going with for now.)  

Re-reviewing this characteristic checklist is interesting, mostly because as already stated it is a subjective value driven assessment (a Coke/Pepsi debate).  Obviously, some players would prefer the pre-19.18 MM and some not, but simply due to the 39+ pages (and counting) of the thread on the official forums there is by no means a consensus of opinion of one MM prevailing over the other.

Quote

 

1. The new MM system creates too many bottom tier matches. Players are bottom tier about 55-60% of the time: 3/5/7 is about 45% and 5/10 is about 12%. (Game enjoyment Issue)

Most players have this great affinity for "top tier" but it's a little less obvious what that actually means.  As noted before most players can't agree that same tier (15/0/0) equals top tier nor define what really constitutes "top tier".  In light of 15/0/0 not being considered top tier Is 14/1/0 or 1/14/0 considered top tier? Why would the substitution of one tank change a players psychological perception if 15/0/0 was not top tier?.

Why even below in point 7, it is proposed that 3 top tier tanks unduly influence the match and arguably 10 top tier tanks (in a multi-tiered match) unduly influence a match.  If the objective is more "top tier" matches and more "balanced" matches where are those limits? The dirty secret is no one knows or is likely to ever know and if these limits could be defined it would be the perfect window for MM.

2. In the new MM, players rarely see top tier matches: 3/5/7 gives about 5% and 5/10 is about 3%. (Game enjoyment Issue)
Same as issue 1.

3. The new MM seems to punish tiers 6 and 8 the worst with bottom tier matches and this is where the bulk of the best premium tanks are located. (Game enjoyment Issue)

I think there is no question that it does.  But just like with tank and map buffs and nerfs where the meta and goal posts move (adding that highly valued trait called variety) there is work to be done here.  The old system didn't punish Tier 6 and 8 as much but it punished Tier 3 and 4 (player retention arguments) as well as other tiers.

4. The new MM is unfair to players in platoons by making them bottom tier much more often and top tier less often than the rest of the player base. (Game enjoyment Issue)
True, however this has been recognized and addressed in later patches.

5. A side-effect of the new MM is that is has essentially nerfed preferential matchmaking premium tanks making them a less viable credit grinding option for players. (Game enjoyment Issue)

It could be argued that this issue has been around much longer than post-9.18 mm.  Most pref MM tanks are not balanced well and this is a larger issue that touches on WG's game vision, tank balance strategies, and monetization, however this seems to be more or less restating point 3.

6. The new MM creates teams that are unbalanced in regards to tank abilities and hit points. (Balance Issue)

True to a certain extent however was much more prevalent in the pre-9.18 MM and one of the design corrections in post-9.18 MM.  Saying that, it has as been recognized and further addressed in later patches as well.

7. The new MM template system has taken some "flavor" out of the game and it encourages a more repetitive and dull nature to the game. (Game enjoyment Issue)

This is also somewhat true, however "repetitive and dull" are subjective value driven assessments.  Having said that, if we could figure out point 1, WG could open up MM with a few more templates within the limits.

8. The three top tier tanks in the 3/5/7 system have a greater influence on the outcome of a match than in the previous MM system. (Balance Issue)

It could also be argued that the 7 bottom tier tanks have an increased influence on the outcome of 3/5/7 matches. Further, it could also be argued that is correlation without causation as tier to tier imbalances and tank to tank imbalances also play a significant role in this influence.  Again, if we could figure out point 1, WG could open up MM limits.   

9. With the large increase in bottom tier matches and the even larger decrease in top tier matches players have lost some control over their ability to influence the outcome of their matches. (Game enjoyment Issue)

This is a subjective value driven assessment and integrated with previous issues, however to assume that player performance is primarily dictated by tier placement is much too simplistic and obviously a very poor model.

10. Players are seeing a pattern and speculating that the new MM was designed to make you pay more real money for the game and it has nothing to do with helping players.

Players say this about any/every change to the game... (and this statement is official forum level tinfoil hat shittery)

 

On a related note

Liberty75 your proposed solution was essentially "tank tier and tank matching" instead of general tier and type/role matching and I suggested then that was just a different form of template matching.  Did you respond to that? (perhaps I missed it).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, monjardin said:

@Liberty75

It was not my intent to personally attack you, and I definitely didn't get offended by your arguments in any way. We just have a subjective difference of opinion in the topic.

I have a personal preference for single tier matches (i.e. 15 tier 10 tanks on each side). If you don't like those sorts of matchups, then the new MM is probably less enjoyable for you. 

I'll agree to disagree. ;)

I wasn't offended. I just didn't want to offend you. :)

I can understand your preference for all the same tier battles. They are fun sometimes. I just wouldn't like them all the time.

 

4 hours ago, 8_Hussars said:

Notwithstanding, that empirically most pre-9.18 MM complaints were about a 6/6/3 tier structure on one team with a 4/6/5 on the other; exacerbated by a tank role imbalance of 6 top tier heavies vs 4 top tier TDs.  (This may well be wrong but its what I am going with for now.)  

Re-reviewing this characteristic checklist is interesting, mostly because as already stated it is a subjective value driven assessment (a Coke/Pepsi debate).  Obviously, some players would prefer the pre-19.18 MM and some not, but simply due to the 39+ pages (and counting) of the thread on the official forums there is by no means a consensus of opinion of one MM prevailing over the other.

 

On a related note

Liberty75 your proposed solution was essentially "tank tier and tank matching" instead of general tier and type/role matching and I suggested then that was just a different form of template matching.  Did you respond to that? (perhaps I missed it).

My wife is going to kill you, then me for diverting my attention to another hour of "her" time with forum posts. :)

6/6/3 vs. 4/6/5 is close. I get your point. The old MM did create mismatches in tiers and classes due to the weight system it employed and believe me, I am not celebrating it. It had its own issues. Those issues could have been addressed by WG though, but instead they went with a whole new untested system of strict templates (one of the reasons I am suspicious of their motives). When WG praises the new system, all I have to do is remember that they used to praise the old system as well, then trashed it. So their enthusiasm about the success and benefits of any system is suspect at this point. They are selling something and are not to be trusted.

While the difference in some game mechanics can be subjective, the MM doesn't exactly fit into that hole completely. The current MM is bland and repetitive compared to the previous system. That is measurable. Players might not consciously admit to this, but it is a factor nevertheless. Chances are most players won't notice anything overtly. They will just tire of the game and move on. The younger and more intelligent players will be affected by this the most as their minds crave a challenge and they get bored more easily than the rest of us. How that hurts the overall population in the short term, I don't know. Over the long term, me and the other average intelligence players will also be affected by this.

This game plays best when it is fun, includes a certain amount of unpredictability, it is challenging, and it is perceived to be fair. Perhaps I missed something, but I think those are the main ingredients for success.

The old MM covered the first three items very well. Players at most skill levels had the opportunity for fun at top tier. The team setups and placement of top, middle, and bottom tier were unpredictable. In the +2/-2 system players were challenged at bottom and middle tier. The perception of fairness was lacking, whether or not it actually was (it most likely was over extended games).

The new MM includes the challenge aspect and the perception of fairness (perhaps unfairly), but it lacks unpredictability and fun.

Had they tweaked the former system with some of the balancing features that they introduced in the current system, it would have been an overall winner for most, if not all, players.

 

Note about defining top tier. I remember being in a battle with only one tier 10 and a few tier 9s. I was in an 8. It was something like this: 1/3/11. Everyone on both teams knew the tier 10 was top tier. It only takes one tank to fill that slot to create that perception. WG has trained us well. :) Tanks of higher tiers also have more obvious advantages on average. So in a 1/14/0 situation, most players recognize the superiority of the top tier tank. Now in a 1/14/0 match, there is a top tier tank, but the other tanks also recognize it is only one and it isn't a big deal. That was the beauty of the old MM, the teams were always varied. One match you would be bottom tier, but in a group of 9 tanks, so it wasn't that bad and you could play more aggressively. Later in the evening you had a bottom tier match that was 6/5/4 and you knew you had to be more cautious and play a support role. The variety was great and sadly it seems to be lost now.

About the reason for 3 tanks having too much of an influence... If those 3 tanks are not distributed well, 3 good players vs. 3 bad players, then the 3 good players at top tier have an advantage. My friends focused on this aspect of the new MM back in May  and June. It was every battle where the top tier tanks were noticeably better on one team than the other, that team won. It didn't matter what the skill level was beneath them. No one wants to make 10 tanks top tier to fix this, but as you add in tanks to the top tier, the chances increase that the top tier tanks on both teams will come closer to the mean of the player base logged into the game. Going to 4, 5, or 6 increases the odds of getting more even teams at the top. It isn't guaranteed, it is just more likely.

I'd write more, but I need to go practice soccer with my son. If there is something you want me to hit on that I missed in your last post, just copy and paste it into a reply.

Take care Hussars!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Supposing hypothetically that all tiers had high enough populations so that queue times were never a problem, the ideal MM would be same-tier all day 'erry day. Something like a KV-5 may be the only exception where it absolutely has to fight against tier 6s and 7s to not be a total waste of time. Particularly when we're talking about armor vs pen mechanics, the tighter the tier spread, the easier balancing gets. And perhaps going a little more theoretical than that, the more these values are tuned for fighting at just one particular tier, the closer we get to a system where RNG becomes totally redundant and eradicated from the face of the earth (may it happen speedily in our days, amen).

Back to the current reality, 5/10 is probably the best compromise we can expect in the meantime. The problem is really that some tiers have the population to arrange whatever you could possibly want whenever you want it, but others do not. And WG accidentally stumbled onto an idea to help fix that, pity that their execution of it was so sloppy though. Imagine if 'grand battles' happened at tier 8 rather than tier 10. 'Nuff said. :serb:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Mikosah said:

Supposing hypothetically that all tiers had high enough populations so that queue times were never a problem, the ideal MM would be same-tier all day 'erry day.

Would you not get bored of this? The vast majority of both teams in every single match of any individual tier would be in the same 10-15 tanks. If the game feels repetitive now, I'd hate to see what it would be like with +/- 0.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All same tier, and even +1/-1 are awfully dull propositions for a system. While they are fine to have sometimes, when they are the only system it would drive people away from the game.

The predictable nature of the 3/5/7, 5/10, and same tier matches is already becoming overly tedious to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Rexxie said:

Would you not get bored of this? The vast majority of both teams in every single match of any individual tier would be in the same 10-15 tanks. If the game feels repetitive now, I'd hate to see what it would be like with +/- 0.

Honestly no, boredom never even crossed my mind. But think bigger-picture for a second, any one tier may seem to become more repetitive at face value but without the threat of higher tiers nor the obligation to lead the lower tiers, more tactical options open up. And besides, tighter MM spreads may just mean finally having an excuse to play at more than just a couple different tiers. And if the tier spread was tightened and WG actually made use of that opportunity to do away with unnecessary RNG, they may finally be in a position to make a competitive mode that doesn't suck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mikosah said:

Honestly no, boredom never even crossed my mind. But think bigger-picture for a second, any one tier may seem to become more repetitive at face value but without the threat of higher tiers nor the obligation to lead the lower tiers, more tactical options open up. And besides, tighter MM spreads may just mean finally having an excuse to play at more than just a couple different tiers. And if the tier spread was tightened and WG actually made use of that opportunity to do away with unnecessary RNG, they may finally be in a position to make a competitive mode that doesn't suck.

Using an even bigger picture It's no coincidence that staggered tier spread in MM drives player and account development and is a key part of the game monetization.  If players never get exposed to or get pwned by that +2/+1/Premium tank then they will never have incentive to grind (or pay) for them.  Further, if they are never exposed to higher tier tanks they will never be inspired to learn how to fight them or further develop as a player (lel).  Ultimately, if players never move up the tiers then the game monitization stagnates and fails.

I agree with @Liberty75 and @Rexxie on this point, obviously a certain sub-set of +0 games adds to the variety (as they are relatively rare) but a more steady diet of them (or even +1/-1 limits) would stagnate the game even more...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mikosah said:

Honestly no, boredom never even crossed my mind. But think bigger-picture for a second, any one tier may seem to become more repetitive at face value but without the threat of higher tiers nor the obligation to lead the lower tiers, more tactical options open up. And besides, tighter MM spreads may just mean finally having an excuse to play at more than just a couple different tiers. And if the tier spread was tightened and WG actually made use of that opportunity to do away with unnecessary RNG, they may finally be in a position to make a competitive mode that doesn't suck.

I understand your desire in general. But for me and many people that I play with, the bigger picture is having game mechanics that minimize the repetitive nature inherent in this game. I have played thousands of matches, as most players have at this point in the game's life, and I would like to play thousands more. The strict template mechanics introduced in 9.18 or any mechanics that lessen the variety of the game should be avoided.

After 6 months of this new MM, I am actually indifferent to seeing all the same tier matches. They tend to be the dullest matches I have. That could just be my luck in those matches, or perhaps it is in the nature of those matches. I don't know for sure, yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/3/2017 at 3:46 AM, 3MAJ86 said:

no, since i don't play those tiers. Total number of matches in those tiers are less than 100, so the small sample is statistically insignificant.

 

Sorry :( 

 

If anyone is interested, i can make a data dump, so you can do with it whatever you want. I made pretty neat dashboard in QlikView by using WoTNumbers database. The only problem is, if WoTNumbers stops updating, all my work becomes useless :) 

 

On 10/3/2017 at 6:15 AM, Liberty75 said:

No problem. Thanks for the information you provided. I don't know if you can manipulate your data for one last thing. Out of the tier 8 bottom tier matches, can you identify how many top tier tanks were in those matches? (Ex. 1 top tier = 3%, 2 = 7%, etc.). And also how many bottom tier tanks were in your matches when you were bottom tier in the same way? So this information should only be coming from your 25% bottom tier matches.

Hi 3MAJ86. I hate to bother you again, but if you still have your old match information, can you tell me how many bottom tier tanks were in your bottom tier matches? How often were you a single bottom tier tank at tier 8? Or in a group of 2, 3, or 4?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.