Jump to content


Consol will you stop your MM from rigging so many matches? Please!

Balance MM Rigged Matches

  • Please log in to reply
62 replies to this topic

Rubbelito #41 Posted 03 June 2019 - 05:09 AM

    Major

  • WoTC Online Contributor
  • 24438 battles
  • 8,441
  • [IMTLZ]
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

View PostJaymz787b, on 03 June 2019 - 02:08 AM, said:

Is there some algorithm running in the match making software that could allocate at least 30% of tier 8 games to be the top tier?

 

Not that we know of (and probably not).

Only thing we know (as we've been told) is that the  MM tries to put you at least middle tier if you had 2 straight bottom tier games.

Other than that, with a lot of unluck you could end up being bottom tier for 67% of the games.



M4ntiX #42 Posted 03 June 2019 - 07:52 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 29383 battles
  • 3,984
  • [JOCO]
  • Member since:
    03-18-2014

View PostJaymz787b, on 03 June 2019 - 12:08 AM, said:

Hi all

 

I've noticed that after the last update that almost all the time I play a tier 8 i'm against tier 10's. I'm glad there are so many tier 10's playing (as I a quite a few myself), but it makes it a real challenge (wanted or unwanted) to be successful with a tier 8 when you are mostly a bottom feeder in the game match making.

Is there some algorithm running in the match making software that could allocate at least 30% of tier 8 games to be the top tier? Rather than what seems to be 80% of tier 8 games being the bottom tier?

 

This has nothing to do with the latest update but the Machine contract. A lot of people are now on the last two stages that require playing only tier IX and X vehicles.

 

If you're not convinved, look at the queue numbers per tier and you'll see most people are playing high tiers. I've noticed playing early in the morning on EU increases your chances of being top tier in a tier VIII. Give it a shot if you can.

 

Or... play a PMM tier VIII tank, at least you wont see any tier X's.


"I live in reality and let me tell you, there is no one here."

"For some reason you feel the need to troll stink bomb a statement of fact."

"4 kids single father 2 boats a plane 3cars and more battles than you."

"Jesus you smegheads are whiny about your Epeens."


RAD FROOD 25 #43 Posted 03 June 2019 - 08:10 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 20503 battles
  • 1,441
  • [PR1D3]
  • Member since:
    04-26-2014
The matchmaking is terrible but what can we do about it, other than complain to the powers at be, who will by and large ignore it because they see the same old posts over and over again. 

M4ntiX #44 Posted 03 June 2019 - 08:12 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 29383 battles
  • 3,984
  • [JOCO]
  • Member since:
    03-18-2014

View PostRAD FROOD 25, on 03 June 2019 - 08:10 AM, said:

The matchmaking is terrible but what can we do about it, other than complain to the powers at be, who will by and large ignore it because they see the same old posts over and over again. 

 

I don't see a problem with the matchmaker. From day one it has been less than perfect and I got used to it. Besides, if it wasn't for the imbalance, we would never have epic carries and battles to remember. The game would be boring.

 

Also, it's a fantastic conversation item. ;)


"I live in reality and let me tell you, there is no one here."

"For some reason you feel the need to troll stink bomb a statement of fact."

"4 kids single father 2 boats a plane 3cars and more battles than you."

"Jesus you smegheads are whiny about your Epeens."


RAD FROOD 25 #45 Posted 03 June 2019 - 08:18 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 20503 battles
  • 1,441
  • [PR1D3]
  • Member since:
    04-26-2014

View PostM4ntiX, on 03 June 2019 - 08:12 AM, said:

 

I don't see a problem with the matchmaker. From day one it has been less than perfect and I got used to it. Besides, if it wasn't for the imbalance, we would never have epic carries and battles to remember. The game would be boring.

 

Also, it's a fantastic conversation item. ;)

 

From day one. Yes from the first day playing this bloody game, the matchmaking can kick you in the nuts and then stroke them nicely the next. The matchmaking would be better if of course more people actually played the damn game. 

Stahlbrezel #46 Posted 03 June 2019 - 08:36 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 27613 battles
  • 348
  • Member since:
    11-26-2016

View PostRubbelito, on 03 June 2019 - 06:09 AM, said:

 

Not that we know of (and probably not).

Only thing we know (as we've been told) is that the  MM tries to put you at least middle tier if you had 2 straight bottom tier games.

Other than that, with a lot of unluck you could end up being bottom tier for 67% of the games.

 

... and only if u stay in the same tier, respectively even same tank three times in a row, i've read somewhere... is this confirmed fact, or just rumors?

Hic Rhodus, hic salta... ~ Aesop

 

 


Rubbelito #47 Posted 03 June 2019 - 08:39 AM

    Major

  • WoTC Online Contributor
  • 24438 battles
  • 8,441
  • [IMTLZ]
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

View PostRAD FROOD 25, on 03 June 2019 - 10:18 AM, said:

 

From day one. Yes from the first day playing this bloody game, the matchmaking can kick you in the nuts and then stroke them nicely the next. The matchmaking would be better if of course more people actually played the damn game. 

 

You are talking about the general steamrolls?

Those are mostly caused by players, not the MM.

There are a few flaws with the MM, like the way it handles platoons,  but it has  nothing to do with you being put together with a bunch of potatoes.

 

View PostStahlbrezel, on 03 June 2019 - 10:36 AM, said:

 

... and only if u stay in the same tier, respectively even same tank three times in a row, i've read somewhere... is this confirmed fact, or just rumors?

 

I'm  honestly not sure if you need to stay in the same tier or tank, but it might be the case. I can't say I've personally seen any WG confirmation but that doesn't mean there can't be any.



Albapfalzd3 #48 Posted 03 June 2019 - 11:39 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 22523 battles
  • 2,829
  • Member since:
    04-07-2017

When ever MM gives one team (Red or Green) a clear and usually decisive advantage, that is a rigged match. It is a brutal consequence of the current MM algorithm that places quick queue times over balanced teams but it is what it is. Some times it is laughable bad as we have seen time and again and some times it is subtle but enough. And then some times MM does a pretty good job and you have a tight match that is fun to both play and watch (if you get taken out). Now just because MM deals you a crappy hand doesn't mean it is over. I was in a match this weekend that by just looking at the MM we should have rolled right over the Reds but they in fact rolled right over us. I didn't bother to analyze the replay to see how our team which should have clearly won didn't but I do from time to time. You can learn and see a lot by doing that.

 

Roy



im_balthazur #49 Posted 03 June 2019 - 11:51 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 40503 battles
  • 321
  • [DODTR]
  • Member since:
    09-02-2017

MM is broke. Everyone knows it. 

 

However, until they find someone capable of of fixing their two broken servers ( yes, just two) then what does it matter?

 

To complain about MM is a waste of time. Complain about the biggest issue or face a troll online contributors wrath.



im_balthazur #50 Posted 03 June 2019 - 11:52 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 40503 battles
  • 321
  • [DODTR]
  • Member since:
    09-02-2017
PS... until they realize people don’t mind waiting a couple or three minutes for a balanced game, it will stay broken.

im_balthazur #51 Posted 03 June 2019 - 11:55 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 40503 battles
  • 321
  • [DODTR]
  • Member since:
    09-02-2017

View PostRAD FROOD 25, on 03 June 2019 - 08:18 AM, said:

 

From day one. Yes from the first day playing this bloody game, the matchmaking can kick you in the nuts and then stroke them nicely the next. The matchmaking would be better if of course more people actually played the damn game. 

 

agreed. But that means capable servers in more than two locations. WG and it’s backwards thinking. 

 

 



Rubbelito #52 Posted 03 June 2019 - 12:01 PM

    Major

  • WoTC Online Contributor
  • 24438 battles
  • 8,441
  • [IMTLZ]
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

View PostAlbapfalzd3, on 03 June 2019 - 01:39 PM, said:

When ever MM gives one team (Red or Green) a clear and usually decisive advantage, that is a rigged match

 

That's not the correct definition  of rigged in this context imo.

The  MM works with battle weight, and there's an allowed weight discrepancy between the two teams.
Obviously, that small discrepancy could give an advantage, but more often than not it's the players that decide the outcome.

 



Stahlbrezel #53 Posted 03 June 2019 - 12:16 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 27613 battles
  • 348
  • Member since:
    11-26-2016

Looks like we were on the same team @albapfalz^^... had a T9 match at El-Woofwoof at the WE. We had 9 Heavies 5/6 of them where high-tiers vs. reds with just 2 Heavies at all. Just my Conq a TD and a Medium went to the Heavy A/B 1/2 corner. Actually i don't support abandoned sides anymore, since it is useless when green game-play so obviously flaws.

In this case i took the chance, as i was hoping the reds where a little intimidated by the advantage of our setup. What can i say... i was wrong. Half of the reds swarmed over the heavy corner and i was in garage in no time.

 

Personally i believe that balancing players would be more important than balancing teams hardware... but i really don't understand, if literally everybody moans about the MM, what is so difficult for WG to change the algorithm? Let them players stay a litte longer in the queue... and they'd be still happy, because of more balanced setups. This can't be rocket-science?


Hic Rhodus, hic salta... ~ Aesop

 

 


RxLaw #54 Posted 09 July 2019 - 05:12 PM

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 73777 battles
  • 32
  • [DOA]
  • Member since:
    02-15-2014

View PostM4ntiX, on 03 June 2019 - 03:12 AM, said:

 

I don't see a problem with the matchmaker. From day one it has been less than perfect and I got used to it. Besides, if it wasn't for the imbalance, we would never have epic carries and battles to remember. The game would be boring.

 

Also, it's a fantastic conversation item. ;)

Hopefully this past week showed that MM can be changed, AND work, AND make gameplay more fun.  Only step left is to make it permanent.



TemplarKnight75 #55 Posted 09 July 2019 - 05:18 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 21805 battles
  • 4,098
  • [OJD]
  • Member since:
    12-05-2015

View PostRxLaw, on 09 July 2019 - 12:12 PM, said:

Hopefully this past week showed that MM can be changed, AND work, AND make gameplay more fun.  Only step left is to make it permanent.

 

none of this is based on fact just opinion. And making decisions based on opinions is an awful idea especially for game design.

TocFanKe4 #56 Posted 09 July 2019 - 05:52 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 20965 battles
  • 24,345
  • [GIRLS]
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostRxLaw, on 09 July 2019 - 12:12 PM, said:

Hopefully this past week showed that MM can be changed, AND work, AND make gameplay more fun.  Only step left is to make it permanent.

 

Didn't make it more fun for me. Made it less fun


 

The E25 was built for Shenanigans


mi amigo 9 #57 Posted 09 July 2019 - 08:47 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 19758 battles
  • 373
  • Member since:
    12-24-2016

View Postkromhout55, on 02 June 2019 - 07:11 AM, said:

 

In the majority of the games I have experienced such lopsided MM there have been no platoons on either side to confuse the poor MM'er.

So I'm afraid that the Sugar Coaters can't throw that excuse around.

Now I will accept that low player population can affect the MM but even still the MM'er just doesn't seem to work as intended at those times.

For example just played a 7 v 7 Tier VIII match on Ravaged Capital where the MM put all the heavies, six of them, on the opposing side. Whilst we had five mediums and two light tanks. No platoons, I think they were all still in bed.

Now why couldn't the MM split it up a bit more evenly?

 

Ha ha.  Today I got a match where the red had 3 platoons and we had none.  One of them was bottom tier so I guess we were balanced.  yeah the game ended 13-0 but on a positive note I got top of the losers leaderboard.

AutographGrain9 #58 Posted 09 July 2019 - 09:16 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 35709 battles
  • 293
  • Member since:
    11-06-2014

Just used a 10x crew boost op , and our team got totally annihilated , the red team lost only two tanks. Is the player base this bad ?

or just the curse of using boost ops ?



RawleyF #59 Posted 10 July 2019 - 12:56 AM

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 8186 battles
  • 42
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View PostRubbelito, on 01 June 2019 - 09:52 AM, said:

Was there just a tinfoil sale on K-mart?

Stop it with the fanboy defense.  Just stop.  You can actually look at player ratings, ya know?  When 12 players on your team are < 50%, it is almost impossible to win.  And to further you "tinfoil hat LOL" take, I've now lost ~35 out of 40 matches since buying the 180 days premium.  Those statistics are very impossible at a random MM rate.  I even took out a couple of OP tanks and witnessed loss after loss despite my top 3 finishes most times.  If you dont think free to play games have a ton of algorithms going on under the hood to milk players as much as possible, you're completely naive.  



RawleyF #60 Posted 10 July 2019 - 01:00 AM

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 8186 battles
  • 42
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View PostStahlbrezel, on 03 June 2019 - 12:16 PM, said:

Looks like we were on the same team @albapfalz^^... had a T9 match at El-Woofwoof at the WE. We had 9 Heavies 5/6 of them where high-tiers vs. reds with just 2 Heavies at all. Just my Conq a TD and a Medium went to the Heavy A/B 1/2 corner. Actually i don't support abandoned sides anymore, since it is useless when green game-play so obviously flaws.

In this case i took the chance, as i was hoping the reds where a little intimidated by the advantage of our setup. What can i say... i was wrong. Half of the reds swarmed over the heavy corner and i was in garage in no time.

 

Personally i believe that balancing players would be more important than balancing teams hardware... but i really don't understand, if literally everybody moans about the MM, what is so difficult for WG to change the algorithm? Let them players stay a litte longer in the queue... and they'd be still happy, because of more balanced setups. This can't be rocket-science?

Absolutely.   The whole community needs to get behind this. Stop giving them positive feedback about 1/1 MM when tanks are already balanced for 2/2.  MM needs tuned for skill, and that's that.  Those who say otherwise are hurting this game by giving WG a pass on a long broken system.  






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users