Jump to content
ZXrage

SS posts on skill MM

Recommended Posts

This is all assuming the skill based MM is applied to ensure that the stated condition exists (15 unis versus 15 unis). We know that isn't ideal, so why run hypotheticals about that scenario? It's possible to implement it so that all you are eliminating is the current possibility of 15 unis versus 15 reds. Because you would give primacy to the other matchmaking rules around tank weights it may only be possible to adjust the matchup to 10 unis 5 reds vs 5 unis 10 reds. That's not going to result in universal 50% win rates and unicums being lumped with teams of bads and it's not going to result in people sitting in queues all day waiting for matches that never come because the game can't give them a match that has a 50% win chance.

 

Elo systems are great for 1v1 games, because they match individual performers against one another in games where skill is the determinant of victory in 100% of cases. WoT is not Chess. It isn't Starcraft. It isn't backgammon, and it isn't a league. It's 15 randoms thrown together against 15 other randoms. So yes, applying an Elo system would screw top performers by lumping them with progressively worse teams and is a terrible idea. It would compress the bell curve on win rate so that only the most terrible and most impressive who couldn't be consistently matched against an equal skilled opponent would maintain a win rate other than 50%. That's why you would not do that.

 

If you're wanting to apply skill based matchmaking in the current environment, you're only wanting to eliminate the most egregious examples of random chance screwing players over, which is all that the current matchmaking system is attempting to do already. I get that WG developers don't appear understand this and would implement something terrible, but that doesn't make it a terrible idea. It just makes it a terrible idea for WarGaming.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, lets make a matchmaker that won't allow sub 850 WN8 players to get top tier ever.  I'm sure that would make a lot of people happy.  Maybe it would elad to less E100's and 50B, and T57's camping K1 on Fiery Salient.

 

Want to play tier 10? Get better!  Wait that would hurt wargaming's profits and lower their player base...

Link to post
Share on other sites

If skill mm comes in, above average players stats will drop, and bad players stats will improve.... depending on how strict the requirement, waiting times could be really terrible for the blues and purples. So almost everyone who posts on this forum..

But here's the thing though, if a potato fights constant matches against other potatoes and performs better, is that player really improving?

Link to post
Share on other sites

But here's the thing though, if a potato fights constant matches against other potatoes and performs better, is that player really improving?

 

Theoretically yes. It's how promotion/relegation works in football around the world. Teams at their tier play, and the best of those move up. Some players who get promoted get better and stay in the higher tier, others yo-yo between the tiers, and others drop down immediately never to return to the higher tier. If they did Skill-based MM in seasons with something similar yet broad-based, like 3 leagues max (Bottom third, middle third, and top third--and separate from randoms it might be interesting.

 

There's plenty of ways to make this work, but knowing Wargaming they'll screw this up (lol WN8 doesn't track spotting... despite the API not releasing it) so I can't exactly be enthusiastic about their implementation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A red player farming other red players is better than a red player getting farmed by other red players, no?

 

I'm sure skill MM could be successful in theory, but I have zero confidence in Wargaming implementing anything other than "more bottom tier games if you win" (i.e. a wet fart worse than not having skill MM).

Link to post
Share on other sites

All this proves is that these developers are completely clueless about their own game. I don't think any of them even play the game. They can't with some of the shit they are speaking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Than pls explain to me why in t10 CWs involving a top clan with a high/"similar" skill level among its players everyone is averaging around the same amount of damage (putting arti and "scouts" to the side here) over time.

We are now talking about tier 10 CWs??? What happened to the topic?

The reason why unicums/blues are able to walk away with a higher DpB, is because pubbies are unable to make damage. Take away the pubbies...

There is no need to take away the pubbies.

This whole skill based mm for me is like groundhog day. All the time people only see two versions of skill based mm and it seems almost impossible to make them understand that there are more ways to have skill based mm than to just balance the teams (the better you are the worse team mates you get) or mirrormatch people (purples vs purples)...

The whole discussion seems to be just a competiton who can come up with the stupidest reason to not have skill based mm. Because it is socialism seems to be clear winner so far. Probably need to get back to official forums to see anything stupider but I really doubt it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tango Delta, we yearn for you to rebuild our beloved game, to lead us into a new age of glory and greatness, to make Wotlabs once more the epicentre of culture and refinement.

Oh great leader, will you once more stand against your foes? Can you build a system that will stand the test of time?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Developer 4 is an idiot. Lights are not factored because their API won't release spotting damage. These guys are imbeciles!

 

 

 

Developer 4:
Why 16-20 matches? PS: i don’t like XVMmod because I’m less than happy on how light tanks are measured on “skill equals damage dealt” equation
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe the amount of ignorance that has wormed its way into this thread.

 

We are now talking about tier 10 CWs??? What happened to the topic?

There is no need to take away the pubbies.

This whole skill based mm for me is like groundhog day. All the time people only see two versions of skill based mm and it seems almost impossible to make them understand that there are more ways to have skill based mm than to just balance the teams (the better you are the worse team mates you get) or mirrormatch people (purples vs purples)...

The whole discussion seems to be just a competiton who can come up with the stupidest reason to not have skill based mm. Because it is socialism seems to be clear winner so far. Probably need to get back to official forums to see anything stupider but I really doubt it.

If those two are not the only options, then explain the other options. 

 

If you can't, then you're pulling "there's other ways" out of your ass and need to stop wasting space.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are artificially matched up with people who are at your level then you will have a harder time producing the same results

 

Not to mention that if two purples are against each other everytime (as should in skill MM), one is going to loose that game. So all purples keeping 70% winrate will become impossible. Best ones obviously are still going to be best ones, but I suppose their stats will take a hit oo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This could be alleviated if Wg would just stop letting players fail/bot their way to tier 10. I really don't mind facing a platoon of purples. What I am tired of is having to face them with an army of used tampax behind me. Even I shouldn't own any tier 10's. Tier 8 max.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to mention that if two purples are against each other everytime (as should in skill MM), one is going to loose that game. So all purples keeping 70% winrate will become impossible. Best ones obviously are still going to be best ones, but I suppose their stats will take a hit oo.

 

The obvious solution to that problem are ranked tiers, levels or leagues. Similar to football leagues where you play an X number of games in your league and if you perform well you get a chance to fight for a promotion and, ofc, if you fail you have to fight in relegation matches. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The obvious solution to that problem are ranked tiers, levels or leagues. Similar to football leagues where you play an X number of games in your league and if you perform well you get a chance to fight for a promotion and, ofc, if you fail you have to fight in relegation matches. 

 

I like the league idea but.. queue times?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The obvious solution to that problem are ranked tiers, levels or leagues. Similar to football leagues where you play an X number of games in your league and if you perform well you get a chance to fight for a promotion and, ofc, if you fail you have to fight in relegation matches. 

 

True dat. It would totally change the approach angle, but it could work. As FlakTrack said, queue times would probably be horrible though. Most likely scenario would be that there's like 1-3 good (=purple, blue) players, 3-5 average (=green, yellow) and 7-10 bad (orange, red) players per team. That still allows best players to farm damage, but it will limit their winrate somewhat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the league idea but.. queue times?

exactly.

 

My winrate is nothing special at wotlabs, but it puts me in the top 1.58% of the server.  I'd likely have issues with queue times, so I wouldn't even want to think about the purple and dark purple wait times

 

Though, with WG's approach to MM, it would probably just mean that after a minute of waiting you'd get a 5v6 match or something.  Fun!  Right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I've gathered:

Skill MM is INDEED possible, but WG, as usual, doesn't have a clue on how to do it, and probably wouldn't be bothered to pull something out of their asses.

In any case, we have to wait 'till November for the poll's results to come in.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Some of the responses in this thread are exemplary of the "mad because bad" tripe that fills the in-game chat.
 
Honestly, if you think there's anything other than you holding down your winrate and ancillary stats, GTFO. Our charter is right there on the top banner: "denying stats deniers." You will simply not get a foothold espousing garbage about rigged matchmaking and unica being given anything other than their ability to learn and abuse the game mechanics.
 
FWIW, I don't have a problem with using an ELO or TrueSkill system for tiered matchmaking. Group players into bands based on their metrics, then randomly pick from those pools to fill teams. It would probably not work given how overly-partitioned WoT matchmaking already is based on battle tiers, but it would be kinda cool if they managed to pull it off.
 
What's been proposed is tiered matchmaking's retarded brother, rigged matchmaking. Garbad hit the nail on the head when he said that he'd bot his way to shit stats just to counteract the effect of his abilities. Anyone skilled that didn't do that would be infuriated with terrible teams game after game and probably driven to quit. In other words, the proposed matchmaking would drive off the competitive crowd and leave only the play4funners and botters.
 
It's been said that Wargaming has accidentally fallen into a giant pile of cash despite themselves. If they implemented the changes as described, they'd have managed to kill this otherwise immortal cash cow. Frankly, I'd be impressed in their tenacity.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the league idea but.. queue times?

 

That is why it should never replace current "random" mm, but come as a separate game mode for enthusiasts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is why it should never replace current "random" mm, but come as a separate game mode for enthusiasts.

 

If queue times are a problem as applied to the entire population (ie change to random mm) then having a different game mode would be that much worse due to limited population.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is why it should never replace current "random" mm, but come as a separate game mode for enthusiasts.

 

That's a great idea.  They could make one for try-hards and another for mouth-breathers. 

 

Maybe call them Clan Wars or Strongholds or something.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe the amount of ignorance that has wormed its way into this thread.

 

If those two are not the only options, then explain the other options. 

 

If you can't, then you're pulling "there's other ways" out of your ass and need to stop wasting space.

All you need is little bit of imagination:

1) only balance the number of reds in both teams

2) same as above but reds+oranges (or purples, blues, yellows...)

3) only balance top tier tanks (or top 5 etc.)

4) never put purples and reds in same battle

5) look which tank types are most effective on that map and balance them

6) you can try to balance lots of things:

a) try to counter all skill (mirror matching, overall team averages)

b) try to counter the ability of people to lose games

c) focus on extremes only

d) focus on platoons only

e) balance only certain tank type (like heavies)

f) balance full teams for overall equality

g) balance part of teams

h) when creating a battle always try to get create teams/battles that fulfill certain statistical parameters (variance, average, weighed average)

i) use preset team rosters as base when creating teams (kinda like mirror matching)

7) ladder based system

8) sbm as separate gamemode (can/can not opt out)

9) ignore players above certain skill and balance everybody else

10) use number of players in teams for balancing

That's what I could come up with after 5 minutes of writing.

Tango Delta, we yearn for you to rebuild our beloved game, to lead us into a new age of glory and greatness, to make Wotlabs once more the epicentre of culture and refinement.

Oh great leader, will you once more stand against your foes? Can you build a system that will stand the test of time?

Dear servant,

there is no point to put any effort into it because it will not lead anywhere. It can be fun just to figure out various ways to do various things. Different ideas do exist and just because lots of people only see stupid solutions to wrong problems does not mean there are not alternatives (that may or not work better or worse than full randomness we have now). After all the goal of sbm is not be perfect but to just be better what we have now...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those are not "different" ideas. Those are the same ones, modified a tiny bit and presented as "new." None of them solve the problem, except perhaps "balance tanks based on effectiveness on a per map basis." That would be interesting because it isn't balancing the players, just the tanks, which leaves more room for skill.

Link to post
Share on other sites

RU server could survive that, EU maaaaaybe. But queue times on SEA and NA servers would be, in lack of a better word right now, insane.

Maus players would have to wait 2 minutes for every match, and than still be placed in an open desert map. If we would lock Maus to only city maps that would break the game even more, imagine a 10vs10 Maus game on Himmelsdorf. It would be funny for a day or two.  :beard:

 

 

One of the main selling points of WoT is on demand PVP / almost instant matchmaking. Every change that increases queue times is therefore unacceptable for Wargaming.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...