Type_93 Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 On the official discord there are quite a few threads about how bad MM is and how unbalanced teams are. Most players there seem to think that balancing a random team by players WR. I don’t think that’s really what SBMM is. All that would do is make it harder on players with high win rates and skill levels. To me SBMM would be more of a bracket style of MM. To me it would be like the following. I’m just using WR as a control here. I’m sure other stats would be more suited but it’s easier for me to make my point using WR. Tier 1 would consist of players with WR of 42% and under. You would only face players with WR in that percentile. Tier 2 would consist of players with WR of 42% to 48%. Tier 3 would consist of players with WR of 48% to 56%. Tier 4 would be players above 56%. I like how randoms are random as it is. But the above is what SNMM in essence means to me. I think a skill based system would drive off the lowest and highest percent players. How do you guys here see SBMM? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfswetpaws Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 10 minutes ago, Type_93 said: How do you guys here see SBMM? Personally, as a waste of time. 🙂 1. It takes longer to sort available players into matches because of the extra layer of decision-making for the matchmaker 2. The "ideal" matches may not happen, because the "ideal" players are not logged-in. Instead, we get matches made with the available players of the moment. 3. The win-rate will naturally decline somewhat if "the best" are constantly pitted against "the best", because someone has to win and someone has to lose. Which means they'll be dropped down into lower win-rate groupings (only to eventually claw their way back up, again). 4. It goes against the principle of "sand-lot neighborhood baseball", which is "everybody plays". We don't care how good or bad you are at playing. Everyone gets a turn at bat and a chance to play. 5. "Professionals" are predictable. It's the "amateurs" which are less predictable and whose choices may lead to hilarious outcomes. 6. Variety is the spice of life. 🙂 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArIskandir Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 A first problem I see is when players peak their skill level. They'll be stuck in a place where they'll be doomed to be "mediocre" in a very consistent way... Let's say my skill level sits around 48-49%, eventually I'll hit the skill wall and I will be presented with games where I'll be consistently outclassed by the better players in my bracket, in time I'll lose enough games as to be "demoted" to the previous bracket and that can be a big moral hit to assimilate... after some time dominating the lower bracket I'll promote again to the higher bracket where I'll be again spanked... doesn't look like a healthy cycle for long term engagement, my guess is most people won't handle well "demotions" and would leave the game. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Type_93 Posted March 5 Author Share Posted March 5 8 minutes ago, ArIskandir said: A first problem I see is when players peak their skill level. They'll be stuck in a place where they'll be doomed to be "mediocre" in a very consistent way... Let's say my skill level sits around 48-49%, eventually I'll hit the skill wall and I will be presented with games where I'll be consistently outclassed by the better players in my bracket, in time I'll lose enough games as to be "demoted" to the previous bracket and that can be a big moral hit to assimilate... after some time dominating the lower bracket I'll promote again to the higher bracket where I'll be again spanked... doesn't look like a healthy cycle for long term engagement, my guess is most people won't handle well "demotions" and would leave the game. That’s pretty much how I see it. I don’t know what other kind of SBMM people are thinking about though. Is there any systems in other games that would apply to the WoWs style of gameplay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfswetpaws Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 I think that some fans of SBMM would like every other player to "play as they would" or to have every other player obey their doctrines or in-game orders. Reminds me of a scene in a James Bond movie https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093428/characters/nm0000833?ref_=tt_cl_c_4 Quote [Bond finds Whitaker playing with toy soldiers] James Bond : Pickett's charge was up Cemetary Ridge, not Little Round Top. Brad Whitaker : I'm reenacting the battle as I would have fought it. Meade was tenacious, but he was cautious. He missed his chances to crush Lee at Gettsyburg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clammboy Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 (edited) 46 minutes ago, ArIskandir said: Let's say my skill level sits around 48-49%, eventually I'll hit the skill wall and I will be presented with games where I'll be consistently outclassed by the better players in my bracket, in time I'll lose enough games as to be "demoted" to the previous bracket and that can be a big moral hit to assimilate... after some time dominating the lower bracket I'll promote again to the higher bracket where I'll be again spanked... doesn't look like a healthy cycle for long term engagement, my guess is most people won't handle well "demotions" and would leave the game. The problem is this is what's happing anyway to players like me and many others with around 48% win rate. In random games for 5 days we are on good teams we cant lose we can push get supported do damage feel like were learning . Then boom the light switch goes on and for 5 days your getting hammered your team loses 5 players in 4 minutes. You have no support your team has players with no games played a 41% win rate and a ship they shouldn't really be in . So I am all for trying something lots of excuses why things cant be done but if you stay status quo your not making anything better either. Edited March 5 by clammboy 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral_Karasu Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 A vexed issue.. I wonder what would actually happen. What I imagine could happen is that the battles fought among the high WR players would be more demanding and less forgiving than the battles fought by the lower WR people. The problem is that this would probably bring everybody's win rates closer to the average, so everyone would end up in the same WR battle bracket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArIskandir Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 20 minutes ago, Type_93 said: That’s pretty much how I see it. I don’t know what other kind of SBMM people are thinking about though. Is there any systems in other games that would apply to the WoWs style of gameplay? Honestly I don't know. Each method has its advantages and disadvantages, my gut opinion is the current system is fairest and more conducent to long term engagement. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArIskandir Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 8 minutes ago, clammboy said: So I am all for trying something lots of excuses why things cant be done but if you stay status quo your not making anything better either. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asym Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 44 minutes ago, Type_93 said: On the official discord there are quite a few threads about how bad MM is and how unbalanced teams are. Most players there seem to think that balancing a random team by players WR. I don’t think that’s really what SBMM is. All that would do is make it harder on players with high win rates and skill levels. To me SBMM would be more of a bracket style of MM. To me it would be like the following. I’m just using WR as a control here. I’m sure other stats would be more suited but it’s easier for me to make my point using WR. Tier 1 would consist of players with WR of 42% and under. You would only face players with WR in that percentile. Tier 2 would consist of players with WR of 42% to 48%. Tier 3 would consist of players with WR of 48% to 56%. Tier 4 would be players above 56%. I like how randoms are random as it is. But the above is what SNMM in essence means to me. I think a skill based system would drive off the lowest and highest percent players. How do you guys here see SBMM? Mechwarrior Online uses that ^^^ format with different numbers. Does it work? Not really because there are too few players to make logical matches by skill level. All mature games suffer from population antics: too few. too new. too old. too skilled. too impatient. too........... 15 minutes ago, Type_93 said: That’s pretty much how I see it. I don’t know what other kind of SBMM people are thinking about though. Is there any systems in other games that would apply to the WoWs style of gameplay? Yes. As I said before, one of the SIMs I worked on and a demo of a new game I visited, have and use CE (Combat Effectiveness). Small populations need variety and to do that the SBMM can't be "linear" because, CE isn't linear. Take for example you are a DD main and hate BB's... Your CE isn't applicable to each of them. It is applied to the ship you choose and the CPT that Commands it and You.... Your DD CE isn't the same as your BB CE.... Map complexity demands levels of CE and if you are on a complicated map, how CW is referenced and applied differently.... Again, take a ship on Ocean and compare it to Two Brothers....apples and oranges... You as a player have/has a CE "reference" - a core CE value. So, there aren't "levels of skill".....there is only Skill in the metric CE. A Barney level player could fight lower CE players where they, the lower players get much more "Value" and the CE Barney simply can't take ships with High CE values... Would it work in this game? I doubt it because of the cost to produce it and, it's an advanced concept that worked in SIMs and will work in the AI driven games....from what I've done or worked with/reviewed.... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asym Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 5 minutes ago, ArIskandir said: Honestly I don't know. Each method has its advantages and disadvantages, my gut opinion is the current system is fairest and more conducent to long term engagement. yeah ! KISS. But, that limits your market. Some games have both: a skill segment and a non-skill segment. Think of it as COOP versus Clan Battles... This game could do that with the data they already have.... Create a CE metric and use it in Brawls and ASB's.... Small changes. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frostbow Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 56 minutes ago, Type_93 said: there are quite a few threads about how bad MM is and how unbalanced teams are. Most of these threads will not even touch on the root of the clamor for SBMM: bad, and very bad players that vastly outnumber average to unicum-level players. And even if there is SBMM, there remains other uncontrollable factors like AFKs, griefing, etc. I've had a Benson who literally did nothing but sit at spawn and shit talk our team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asym Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 1 minute ago, Frostbow said: Most of these threads will not even touch on the root of the clamor for SBMM: bad, and very bad players that vastly outnumber average to unicum-level players. And even if there is SBMM, there remains other uncontrollable factors like AFKs, griefing, etc. I've had a Benson who literally did nothing but sit at spawn and shit talk our team. Average players? Really>? There aren't any left in PVP??? All of the average players I know are in PVE several years now... It's the noobs versus the Barney's and if we want to talk about a "Skill Disparity"......yikes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral_Karasu Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 11 minutes ago, Frostbow said: Most of these threads will not even touch on the root of the clamor for SBMM: bad, and very bad players that vastly outnumber average to unicum-level players. And even if there is SBMM, there remains other uncontrollable factors like AFKs, griefing, etc. I've had a Benson who literally did nothing but sit at spawn and shit talk our team. Was it fun and engaging? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asym Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 2 minutes ago, Admiral_Karasu said: Was it fun and engaging? [face slap emoji] 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfswetpaws Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 3 minutes ago, Asym said: [face slap emoji] We have two of those to choose from. 🙂 🤦♂️🤦♀️ 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Type_93 Posted March 5 Author Share Posted March 5 5 minutes ago, Asym said: Average players? Really>? There aren't any left in PVP??? All of the average players I know are in PVE several years now... It's the noobs versus the Barney's and if we want to talk about a "Skill Disparity"......yikes. There are still very many avg players in pvp. Those with 48ish WR and 1000-1200PR. And plenty of us veteran players who do dumb stuff we know better than to do on the regular. Looking at myself there. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral_Karasu Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 Just now, Type_93 said: There are still very many avg players in pvp. Those with 48ish WR and 1000-1200PR. And plenty of us veteran players who do dumb stuff we know better than to do on the regular. Looking at myself there. If I'm permitted to compliment myself by calling myself an average player, since the subs 'joined' us, I've been more or less trying to steer clear of the randoms, except for occasional forays in the high tier environment in a moment of temporary insanity, or when I'm having to grind some mid tier ships. This is also because I've noticed that a lot of the tier 6 ships are rather helpless in the operations. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Type_93 Posted March 5 Author Share Posted March 5 2 minutes ago, Admiral_Karasu said: If I'm permitted to compliment myself by calling myself an average player, since the subs 'joined' us, I've been more or less trying to steer clear of the randoms, except for occasional forays in the high tier environment in a moment of temporary insanity, or when I'm having to grind some mid tier ships. This is also because I've noticed that a lot of the tier 6 ships are rather helpless in the operations. For the most part I only play T10. There is about 80% chance of a sub on each team. CVs you see slightly less. It’s very rare to see 2 subs in a T10 match. The low tiers I’d assume you see many more 1 cv, 2 sub games. I think the game play at 10 is a much better experience, but that’s just my 2 cents. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asym Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Type_93 said: There are still very many avg players in pvp. Those with 48ish WR and 1000-1200PR. And plenty of us veteran players who do dumb stuff we know better than to do on the regular. Looking at myself there. Oh-kay, then explain the everlasting, ever present, every annoying: Stomps... That math doesn't add up then... Stomps are caused by severe skill variations. if there was a "large number" of average players, there'd be very few Stomps. (considering this game's lack of a SBMM depends of the 69% of a random distribution to function without on-going stomps.) I am an average player and all I saw were stomps after stomps after stomps.... Please explain the math then? Edited March 5 by Asym 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frostbow Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 27 minutes ago, Asym said: All of the average players I know are in PVE several years now... All the average players you know. Not all the average players of the entire player base. 28 minutes ago, Admiral_Karasu said: Was it fun and engaging? And it was a thinking man's game. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frostbow Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 14 minutes ago, Asym said: I am an average player and all I saw were stomps after stomps after stomps.... SBMM is no guarantee to avoid or reduce, nor is it a cure to stomps after stomps after stomps. Players still need to perform and perform consistently in battle no matter the match making result. We do not know why we keep on seeing lopsided teams. For example, one team has an average WR of 53.45% while the other team as an average WR of 49.40%. It could be intentional on the part of Wargaming so as to arrest/pause solo win streaks depending on one's recent battle results—but that is just my opinion. But even so, it is up to each and every player to perform. I've been on teams facing unicum/purple players, and yet we still won. We carried our asses to victory despite the odds not in our favor. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clammboy Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 14 minutes ago, Type_93 said: For the most part I only play T10. There is about 80% chance of a sub on each team. CVs you see slightly less. It’s very rare to see 2 subs in a T10 match. The low tiers I’d assume you see many more 1 cv, 2 sub games. I think the game play at 10 is a much better experience, but that’s just my 2 cents. Tier 10 to me would seem the most fair and balanced tier from a ship perspective not really being able to be up tiered and mostly good players. Like you said probably less subs and CV players to. However I lack the patience and skill to consistently play tier 10 and in all honesty I am not a fan of the tier 10 meta. But I can certainly understand why good players would like to play there it probably has better balance then other tiers. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Type_93 Posted March 5 Author Share Posted March 5 3 hours ago, Asym said: Oh-kay, then explain the everlasting, ever present, every annoying: Stomps... That math doesn't add up then... Stomps are caused by severe skill variations. if there was a "large number" of average players, there'd be very few Stomps. (considering this game's lack of a SBMM depends of the 69% of a random distribution to function without on-going stomps.) I am an average player and all I saw were stomps after stomps after stomps.... Please explain the math then? Stomps happen, but they aren’t as common as some of you make them out to be. At high tiers anyways. I dont play under T10 often at all. I’m sure most of the PVE mains here ventture into randoms every once in a while, but not enough to say anything more than very slight percentage of what really goes on in pvp. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thornzero Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 For the past three weeks - [off and on, not really a lot of randoms] - I've been mostly around 6o%. [I am in the beginning stages of not being a potato.] To-day I could barely scrape 25%. Of those few matches of 8 there was 2 wins and 6 losses. Two of the losses were stomps. Two of the losses I could have played better. The other two losses I played well but there was nothing else I could do. One of the wins I had a low contribution, the other a more significant contribution that had I not played as well we very may well have lost. What I am seeing is what the guys on the old forum were saying. Mostly, part of it is playing well and part of it is luck. Most of the teams on potato alert were not in my favour; sometimes several percentage points or damage points different. One of the wins the alert gave us a lower wr average than the other team and we managed. So when I see regular unicums averaging 6o% I realise they lose 4 out of 1o matches. These matches could have just gone wrong, or had too much inexperience on the team match-up. But the good players will win more than 5o%. Which 5o% is just average, and they would be playing //more// consistently above average. Something else I notice is it takes about 2-3 above average or excellent players to win out of the 12 assigned to the team. So when the old timers say get gud, they mean be one of those extra good players and get the win. It is my opinion that the MM is not broken and these reasons are why WG doesn't see a problem with it. Last September with 6oo randoms I was sitting at 41%. Its been about 6 months of regular play and 1,656 more matches I am at 46.72% Due to today's shenanigans I lost .o8 %age points. I sort of took a break and had other things to be doing. Watch some of the twitch streamer unicums and their losses that are out of their control. Happens to everyone. But the difference is sometimes boiled down to one extra good player. I do not think any changes to the MM are in order and I cannot imagine after over 2,ooo matches of effort of quitting pvp randoms for the child's play of co-op unless I feel like I need some quick completion of a mission parameter. And barring the 1ok / 2ok or higher 4o%ers some of these to-day potatoes will be tomorrow's unicums. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now