Jump to content


Match making should based on battle numbers


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

Fidel_Dionesio #1 Posted 05 October 2019 - 01:46 PM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 31641 battles
  • 85
  • [OO8]
  • Member since:
    03-31-2016

:)

 


Edited by Fidel_Dionesio, 16 October 2019 - 02:15 AM.


MrDucky17 #2 Posted 05 October 2019 - 02:20 PM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 7058 battles
  • 102
  • [ANZUS]
  • Member since:
    04-14-2018

69 forum posts. Nice.

 

Non-constructive post. User warned.

 

~Elite911.



ZIGZAGZ #3 Posted 05 October 2019 - 02:44 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Member
  • 25131 battles
  • 267
  • [KILLS]
  • Member since:
    02-17-2017

But the queue.... With the number of players in Asia, i think people with 10000+ battles will be waiting 4-5mins to start a battle?

Or do you mean giving a certain weightage to number of battles for matchmaking, something like ratings battle, where instead both teams have similar number of battles played? O_O



BossArdnutz #4 Posted 05 October 2019 - 10:48 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Member
  • 16791 battles
  • 318
  • [DERPU]
  • Member since:
    03-30-2018
I teach my kids that if you can't enjoy losing, you shouldn't play the game.

I see lots of players with tens of thousands of games and win rates in the low 40s. Past performance isn't necessarily predictive of future performance but it seems reasonable to expect that the probability of winning a particular game should be some kind of function of the frequency of the players' win rates...

If you had enough players, you could ensure that people only faced opponents with the exact same win rate and battle count. At that point the chances of winning each battle would be a little less than 50% (allowing for draws).

I find it fun when players with win rates in the 60s complain about losing too often. It'd be like Bill Gates complaining that he's not rich enough, because some of the money in the world doesn't belong to him...

Edited by BossArdnutz, 05 October 2019 - 10:49 PM.


erwin10001 #5 Posted 06 October 2019 - 12:42 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 41983 battles
  • 990
  • [NETS]
  • Member since:
    11-12-2016

some of the afkers have high battle counts. 

 

many games already implement afk detection systems that can kick players from game, but not Blitz.

 

Blitz is unique in that you can not only afk, you can afk your way to a free premium tank!

 

 



Newb179 #6 Posted 06 October 2019 - 02:15 AM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 5485 battles
  • 102
  • [GROWA]
  • Member since:
    07-18-2018

Teams are random. Distribution of players amongst the red and green could be better based on winning rates and battle numbers.

It's the distribution between teams that is the sticky thing.

As for losing, this morning I am winning 1 of 7. I do good on 4 of the losses, getting blue WN8 in there, but not good enough for carrying the team. I quit playing, maybe later in the day I get better mix of players to win.

 



TnkDztroyer #7 Posted 06 October 2019 - 04:52 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Member
  • 7 battles
  • 333
  • Member since:
    02-04-2019

View PostBossArdnutz, on 06 October 2019 - 08:48 AM, said:

I teach my kids that if you can't enjoy losing, you shouldn't play the game.
 
How does one enjoy losing? Unless you mean enjoy the game even if it's a loss? The problem with that is that many wotb games are not at all enjoyable. we get 0/7 losses in a minute where we have done virtually nothing before we're killed! But if it's a close fought nail biter that goes down to the wire, then we can have enjoyed the game, but not the loss.

I see lots of players with tens of thousands of games and win rates in the low 40s. Past performance isn't necessarily predictive of future performance but it seems reasonable to expect that the probability of winning a particular game should be some kind of function of the frequency of the players' win rates...

If you had enough players, you could ensure that people only faced opponents with the exact same win rate and battle count. At that point the chances of winning each battle would be a little less than 50% (allowing for draws).

I find it fun when players with win rates in the 60s complain about losing too often. It'd be like Bill Gates complaining that he's not rich enough, because some of the money in the world doesn't belong to him...

 


The Valkyria Chronicles tanks have arrived! Hurry up and Pay to Win!

TnkDztroyer #8 Posted 06 October 2019 - 04:54 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Member
  • 7 battles
  • 333
  • Member since:
    02-04-2019

View Posterwin10001, on 06 October 2019 - 10:42 AM, said:

some of the afkers have high battle counts. 

 

many games already implement afk detection systems that can kick players from game, but not Blitz.

 

Blitz is unique in that you can not only afk, you can afk your way to a free premium tank!

 

 

 

yeah, because dare I say all they want is as many players playing as possible in the hope they will spend money.

 


The Valkyria Chronicles tanks have arrived! Hurry up and Pay to Win!

TnkDztroyer #9 Posted 06 October 2019 - 05:07 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Member
  • 7 battles
  • 333
  • Member since:
    02-04-2019

View PostFidel_Dionesio, on 05 October 2019 - 11:46 PM, said:

I am so much bothered losing straightly because of teammates that are new in the game,,,, there are players playing with tier 10 with just 1500 battles or even less and they don't know how to fight a good fight which is so much stressful. it's a hypocrisy if you say you still enjoy the game even without winning. the trill of the game is to win against an opponent.

 

exactly

 

we can't blame beginners with their bad play because we all came from there but i think they should be separated in battles.

 

yep. each tier could have a minimun skill requirement based on some sort of player score. but that's not how WG wants the game to be.

 

there are high win rate players as high as even 60-68 % still loses badly because of their teammates who don't know how to play and they complain just after they die which shows that it's not only me who is being bothered by the match making. does amature boxer fights against professional boxer? of course not, how i wish someday the match making will be based on battle counts.

 

unfortunately that is how WG has made the game now. It used to be that players progressed in the tech tree tiers as they acquired more experience and skill. but now, anyone can go straight to tier 9 or 10 just by opening their wallet! and we certainly can't blame good/experienced players who have 'come up thru the ranks' so to speak, for being cheesed off about it. In fact, anyone can play this game without using the tech tree at all! and with no experience of course .. just buy a few premiums and away you go!

 

 


The Valkyria Chronicles tanks have arrived! Hurry up and Pay to Win!

BossArdnutz #10 Posted 07 October 2019 - 01:10 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Member
  • 16791 battles
  • 318
  • [DERPU]
  • Member since:
    03-30-2018
Seems like an internally inconsistent position to me.

1) My WR is lower than it should be, because my teammates are no good.

2) I know my teammates are no good because they have low WR.

But, how come it's only *my* WR that's affected by bad teams? The other players on my team must also have a WR influenced by their teams, so how can I tell the difference between us?

Alternatively, we could accept that everyone gets the same teams and the same random pen/dmg results overall - sometimes strong and sometimes weak - but our personal skill allows us to win through more or less often regardless.

Otherwise, you're left with believing that the game developers somehow pick specific individuals to get consistently better results than others, and for what possible purpose? It's definitely not based on buying premium tanks, at least in my case - take a look at my T-34-3, Type 59 and IS-6 stats of you don't believe me.

Esh11 #11 Posted 07 October 2019 - 05:30 AM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 42270 battles
  • 1,083
  • Member since:
    03-20-2015
I want to play against a team which has players with exact same battle count and exact same win rates !! . Then since I will be playing against an " equal " team everyones wr will drop to 50% . Actually less coz there is more chance of draw as well . So yeah eventually everyone gets the same 47 -48% WR !! The longer this goes on the better it is for MM coz everyone has same WR . Enjoy .

                                           

                                                                 

  


erwin10001 #12 Posted 07 October 2019 - 05:39 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 41983 battles
  • 990
  • [NETS]
  • Member since:
    11-12-2016

View PostBossArdnutz, on 07 October 2019 - 01:10 AM, said:

Seems like an internally inconsistent position to me.

1) My WR is lower than it should be, because my teammates are no good.

2) I know my teammates are no good because they have low WR.

But, how come it's only *my* WR that's affected by bad teams? The other players on my team must also have a WR influenced by their teams, so how can I tell the difference between us?

Alternatively, we could accept that everyone gets the same teams and the same random pen/dmg results overall - sometimes strong and sometimes weak - but our personal skill allows us to win through more or less often regardless.

 

 

 

I agree in general, but note that your ability to win with personal skill is hampered if you are put in lower tier. its much harder to carry in lower tier. I've already stated my suspicion that new players seem to be given more favourable MM, over and above the 3 games or so upper tier for each new tank. It maybe a slightly tweaked higher chance to be in higher tier in general for new players, perhaps to give them a more comfortable game and encourage them to spend money. If new players only got 3 games upper tier per new tank before reverting to the disastrous MM, I'm sure they would quit a lot faster before they had a chance to spend money.

 

this would not be a problem if there was a stable mature playerbase, but there is a lot of attrition and the game playerbase seems to be primarily new players, and if they get favourable MM, then the regulars are the ones disadvantaged.

 

then there are the afk... that one i don't understand, which online game gives rewards (like premium tank) to players who afk? Maybe WG should release a new game, World of Tanks: Idle edition.

 

 



Fidel_Dionesio #13 Posted 07 October 2019 - 12:53 PM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 31641 battles
  • 85
  • [OO8]
  • Member since:
    03-31-2016

k

 

 


Edited by Fidel_Dionesio, 16 October 2019 - 02:15 AM.


Newb179 #14 Posted 07 October 2019 - 03:24 PM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 5485 battles
  • 102
  • [GROWA]
  • Member since:
    07-18-2018
My opinion: the problem is you assume the players on tier 8-10 are veterans of countless battles and competent.
Hint: they are not:
1. Veterans
2. Competent
You would be much better off assuming your teammates are not Veterans, Incompetent and Selfish. Sometimes, once in a blue moon, you get teamwork that restores your faith in humanity. Have you seen the latest video of Bushka?

Edited by Newb179, 07 October 2019 - 03:25 PM.


BossArdnutz #15 Posted 07 October 2019 - 08:16 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Member
  • 16791 battles
  • 318
  • [DERPU]
  • Member since:
    03-30-2018
Or look in the mastery thread at my game in the ISU-122S. The green Challenger executes a perfect short flank when I get rushed by 3 reds, coming out directly behind them. He gets 2 kills out of it and I get to survive and end up with a gold star.

Chally's WR is only average but his or her performance, awareness and teamwork in that battle were just outstanding.

On the other hand the highest-WR player on green in that game uses his Cromwell B to spend the whole game bouncing AP shells off a KV-3 and an SU-100M1, never even switching to APCR. And the red team had much higher WR pretty well any way you want to cut it and comparable experience (especially if you weight it by WR, since the highest-WR player also had by far the most games).

You just can't ever tell what the outcome is going to be from the teams involved. The probabilities, sure, but they're only probabilities and if you play well - and you're lucky and your chosen approach catches the reds looking the wrong way - even a team of potatoes can win against a superior red lineup.

Fidel_Dionesio #16 Posted 12 October 2019 - 03:30 AM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 31641 battles
  • 85
  • [OO8]
  • Member since:
    03-31-2016
c

Edited by Fidel_Dionesio, 16 October 2019 - 02:16 AM.


Newb179 #17 Posted 12 October 2019 - 03:34 PM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 5485 battles
  • 102
  • [GROWA]
  • Member since:
    07-18-2018
Easy there with the conspiracy theory. You are a much better player than I am, but I have killed you recently by teamwork.
You were in Challenger, I was in T-37. It was Normandy, encounter battle and your team was pushing the right side from top spawn. It was 4 of you vs 3 of my team. I was near windmill on the beach, but I saw our left needs help. I went to our left and help my team.
Your team was too focused on our 3, so my arrival tip the balance. We cleaned up our left with 2 losses before the rest of your teammates arrived and killed me after I killed you. Then the rest of my team arrived and killed the rest of your team.
We won that battle by being aware of the battlefield and teamwork, nothing fancy or whatever. And my team was 40%er to low 50%, a little bit lower than your team average.

Fidel_Dionesio #18 Posted 15 October 2019 - 11:33 AM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 31641 battles
  • 85
  • [OO8]
  • Member since:
    03-31-2016

View PostNewb179, on 12 October 2019 - 03:34 PM, said:

e

Edited by Fidel_Dionesio, 16 October 2019 - 02:17 AM.


Newb179 #19 Posted 15 October 2019 - 12:08 PM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 5485 battles
  • 102
  • [GROWA]
  • Member since:
    07-18-2018
I heard you and agree on the hate for slow TD and Heavy Tanks. I've also heard the opinions that the Challenger can be challenging.
I don't know if there is a preferential team distribution but often 1 or 2 good players can make a lot of difference in the team. Maybe it's all there is, a better team distribution needed. When the match making has picked 14 players, team distribution needs some work.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users