Jump to content


Status Update—Fixes to Preferential Matchmaking Feedback Thread

no pref mm removed!

  • Please log in to reply
171 replies to this topic

mttspiii #21 Posted 26 July 2018 - 11:44 PM

    Major

  • Beta-Tester
  • 29504 battles
  • 16,636
  • [CALM] CALM
  • Member since:
    04-15-2012

View PostAoyama_Blue_Mountain, on 26 July 2018 - 11:23 PM, said:

 

Is it? Sorry I was laughing too hard to comprehend properly.

 

If they do keep the pref MM, I sincerely apologize to WG staff and mod please delete the posts related to this side discussion.

 

"We’ll kick-off the preferential tank revision by tweaking their combat parameters. We originally set these parameters so that these tanks can play comfortably and competitively in Tier VIII-IX battles, where they are weaker than other machines in combat given their stats. With this in mind, at Tier X, these tanks would be ineffective which is why they have preferential matchmaking. We will definitely look at their stats to ensure their effectiveness is comparable with the performance of Tier VIIIs and so can remain competitive in those battles (referring to the similarly-blue bit above).

 

There is no blanket solution to this problem, so we’ll address it on a tank-by-tank basis, starting with Tier VIII vehicles. Combat parameters will be improved to better suit the tier spread, while also keeping their gameplay-defining characteristics intact."

 

.

 

The blue bit suggests that the buffs are meant to make these tanks competitive in tier X battles.

The green bit suggests that there will be a change in the tier spread.

 

Totally none of these things say, definitively, that WG will remove pref MM.

WG will just make the pref-MM tanks competitive in tier X, and that these improvements are meant for pref-MM tanks to cope better in their new, adjusted, (undefined) tier spread.


Edited by mttspiii, 26 July 2018 - 11:55 PM.

I'm fierce and I'm feeling mighty,

I'm a golden girl, I'm an Aphrodite

 

 


ksthegreat91 #22 Posted 27 July 2018 - 12:02 AM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 11605 battles
  • 53
  • [F-S-A] F-S-A
  • Member since:
    12-05-2012

View PostAoyama_Blue_Mountain, on 26 July 2018 - 03:23 PM, said:

 

Is it? Sorry I was laughing too hard to comprehend properly.

 

If they do keep the pref MM, I sincerely apologize to WG staff and mod please delete the posts related to this side discussion.

 

Basically to sum it up.

They semi-buff the tanks + keep the PMM.

The_average_tanker #23 Posted 27 July 2018 - 12:05 AM

    Wallet warrior extraordinaire!

  • Member
  • 10557 battles
  • 398
  • [F-S-A] F-S-A
  • Member since:
    06-18-2016

View Postmttspiii, on 26 July 2018 - 09:14 PM, said:

 

"We’ll kick-off the preferential tank revision by tweaking their combat parameters. We originally set these parameters so that these tanks can play comfortably and competitively in Tier VIII-IX battles, where they are weaker than other machines in combat given their stats. With this in mind, at Tier X, these tanks would be ineffective which is why they have preferential matchmaking. We will definitely look at their stats to ensure their effectiveness is comparable with the performance of Tier VIIIs and so can remain competitive in those battles (referring to the similarly-blue bit above).

 

There is no blanket solution to this problem, so we’ll address it on a tank-by-tank basis, starting with Tier VIII vehicles. Combat parameters will be improved to better suit the tier spread, while also keeping their gameplay-defining characteristics intact."

 

.

 

The blue bit suggests that the buffs are meant to make these tanks competitive in tier X battles.

The green bit suggests that there will be a change in the tier spread.

 

Totally none of these things say, definitively, that WG will remove pref MM.

WG will just make the pref-MM tanks competitive in tier X, and that these improvements are meant for pref-MM tanks to cope better in their new, adjusted, (undefined) tier spread.

 

I mean they say the following in the article.

 

"Goal: Improve the experience for preferential tanks while keeping the preferential matchmaking parameter and their unique characteristics intact."

 

I have no idea how they can be any more explicit in their intentions. The quoted part is bolded in the NA article, not so on the asia server article. Maybe it can be highlighted here to bring clarity. 


Edited by The_average_tanker, 27 July 2018 - 12:06 AM.

 

 

 

 


Philharmonic #24 Posted 27 July 2018 - 12:10 AM

    Private

  • Member
  • 37017 battles
  • 5
  • [BAMF] BAMF
  • Member since:
    08-02-2013

Why not just fix your shitty Match making. o changes required to Pref MM tanks and more than 90% of your players will be happy...

 



Larunda #25 Posted 27 July 2018 - 12:10 AM

    Private

  • Member
  • 5958 battles
  • 0
  • Member since:
    07-15-2015
Is there any chance that matching algorithm will not only address tank parameters but also player ratings. I see too many unfair match making where one side there are several unicum (violet and blue rated) players while the other side only has green or yellow rated players. These match making are so easily predictable and ca. 95% correct in outcome.

Meverick #26 Posted 27 July 2018 - 12:27 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Member
  • 50812 battles
  • 869
  • Member since:
    06-10-2013
Time to dust off KV5 yay !

NameWasStolenStresslevel #27 Posted 27 July 2018 - 01:14 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Member
  • 35961 battles
  • 918
  • Member since:
    01-19-2015
(removed)

Edited by NameWasStolenStresslevel, 27 July 2018 - 06:31 AM.

Having META problems?

 #Hashtag break the META

     (HAHAGHa i must have drank somethin)

             https://worldoftanks.asia/en/hall-of-fame/vehicles/A100_T49/#wot&w_ts=overall&w_nb=500

         Currently Hall of Fame T49's number 1 in WTR!!! (parameters are *battles +500* and *since 2014's* ranking)


FramFramson #28 Posted 27 July 2018 - 03:26 AM

    Major

  • Member
  • 38648 battles
  • 3,260
  • Member since:
    02-22-2015

Well, howls of derision aside, I think the changes to pref MM tanks are alright considering they will retain their pref MM, but the REAL question will be how the MM is revised. Pref MM tanks only account for 10% of T8 play and even less of overall play, so that's what's really going to make or break things. 

 

I will say I'm unhappy that - at minimum - there will be another six months of 3/5/7 as it is now, but I suppose this is as much of a commitments as we're likely to get at the moment.


Edited by FramFramson, 27 July 2018 - 03:26 AM.

LT-playing masochist. It's too much fun to be a mosquito.


wasaabi #29 Posted 27 July 2018 - 04:52 AM

    This Dude Abides

  • Senior Moderator
  • 21256 battles
  • 6,426
  • [-1AR-] -1AR-
  • Member since:
    07-15-2012

View Postmttspiii, on 27 July 2018 - 01:44 AM, said:

 

"We’ll kick-off the preferential tank revision by tweaking their combat parameters. We originally set these parameters so that these tanks can play comfortably and competitively in Tier VIII-IX battles, where they are weaker than other machines in combat given their stats. With this in mind, at Tier X, these tanks would be ineffective which is why they have preferential matchmaking. We will definitely look at their stats to ensure their effectiveness is comparable with the performance of Tier VIIIs and so can remain competitive in those battles (referring to the similarly-blue bit above).

 

There is no blanket solution to this problem, so we’ll address it on a tank-by-tank basis, starting with Tier VIII vehicles. Combat parameters will be improved to better suit the tier spread, while also keeping their gameplay-defining characteristics intact."

 

.

 

The blue bit suggests that the buffs are meant to make these tanks competitive in tier X battles.

The green bit suggests that there will be a change in the tier spread.

 

 

No, they say the same thing.  Saying that one thing will be tailored to suit a second thing implies the first thing will be changed and the second thing stays the same.  In this case the "tier spread" means what was mentioned in blue,


The Dude abides.

 
Spoiler

 


Junnygjw123 #30 Posted 27 July 2018 - 05:21 AM

    Private

  • Member
  • 26433 battles
  • 5
  • [CZARS] CZARS
  • Member since:
    10-27-2017
I'd happily play my type 59 in t10 if it got 200/340 pen. Just sayin

Edited by Junnygjw123, 27 July 2018 - 05:22 AM.


Capt_Howdy #31 Posted 27 July 2018 - 05:37 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta-Tester
  • 32779 battles
  • 558
  • Member since:
    09-15-2012

Well Im glad they are NOT removing the Preferential part of the Preferential Premiums and just making them standard premiums. And its good to see they acknowledged they stuffed up on MM, but i still dont see why they dont just reverse the MM and have it 15, 10/5 and finally 3/5/7 as a last resort ( I know you are not going to get 15 Pref Prems on one battle).
I also dont see how its going to take 6 months to fix and feel its way to long to have to wait when if something goes wrong they can fix it in a matter of days (like they did when the 3/5/7 MM first came out) I guess our Player experience and player enjoyment of the game is low on thier priority list (way down below bringing out power creep OP tanks)

I was also thinking that instead of WG bringing out Prem tanks like the KV-2(R)  (which is the same as a standard KV-2), WG should look into just bringing out skins for the tanks and maybe sell them for $10.00 per skin so you could add or remove it as you wish...I want the Sherman skin from the Movie Tank Girl...lol


 


Dabombinable #32 Posted 27 July 2018 - 05:47 AM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 8371 battles
  • 15
  • [MERC] MERC
  • Member since:
    01-12-2015
Sorry not sorry, but I'll still avoid playing WOT until you implement the "not bottom tier the majority of the time" feature that you said was going to be implemented right back when the template MM system was introduced. 6 more months to implement something that was supposed to be implemented May last year? Stop lying or bugger off.

Blue_rogue #33 Posted 27 July 2018 - 05:52 AM

    Private

  • Member
  • 9953 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    01-26-2015
6 months to implement changes? Given that MM has been on WG's radar for a significant period of time (as evidenced by the quote from WG that changes to the MM algorithm wont work), and the fact that WG have release patches within days or weeks of a major update, I cant decide if WG is trolling us or if WG are trying to optimise profits from a broken MM system before they have to make changes. Customers are expected to wait 6 months for a fix to a problem that has been evident for at least 12 months, and that the community has been commenting on for a similar , if not longer period. I for one have lost faith in WG responding in an appropriate time frame or manner to their customer concerns. And given that the proposed changes are not set in stone and subject to change without notice, I cant even rely on that WG tells us they plan to do to be accurate. This is not the way to treat those customers who invest considerable sums of money into a game that, for me, is no longer fun to play or provides and sense of fairness to anyone not playing at tier ten..Its become a case of too little, too late and too slow for the necessary changes to make this game great.

Ezz #34 Posted 27 July 2018 - 05:53 AM

    How many flipping posts do I need to get past Major?

  • Beta-Tester
  • 64069 battles
  • 35,170
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    07-17-2012

So just thinking over WG's approach to prems. They used to be slightly worse than the tree tanks with better mm as the selling point. Then under template mm that mm benefit was largely nullified so they need a new selling point. Meanwhile they started releasing other prems that are better than the tree tanks but same mm. Given the mm advantage now is minimal for pmm tanks, why not buff them all to standard 8 ability? I mean they clearly aren't worried by the p2w moniker so why not embrace it! Their schnazzy new shop will get used more that way. It's a win win for wg. 

 

One bit of good news however is they appear to acknowledge that template mm is broken in... 

"So we’re looking into redesigning the underlying matchmaker rules to improve 3/5/7, 10/5, and 15 template distribution. This will aim to prevent cases of spending 80% of in-game time in 3/5/7 battles at the bottom of the list"

 

However sadly fall short of indicating they are looking at scrapping it. 


Edited by Ezz, 27 July 2018 - 06:21 AM.

Who the [edited] are you? Get Spoofed! "wouldn't be a proper WG balance change if they didn't [edited] something up after all "

>9000 cynicism brought to you by P2W, RIP Balance and the Cartoon Connection

Currently moderating your English speaking community : AALGMadibaCenturion_NZ, Elite911, Moonbase Patrol Copter 7

R. Pubbie: "why are all PBKAC players so rude, arrogant and nasty? and why do Mods favor them?"


CardinalMite #35 Posted 27 July 2018 - 06:24 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Member
  • 26514 battles
  • 876
  • Member since:
    04-18-2014

Problem here is that everyone harps on about the supposed advantage of pmm being only seeing up to tier 9 but given you will see tier 9 or tier 8 almost all the time and hardly ever meet tanks 2 tiers lower, the stats of these tanks need to be good enough to be at least minimally competive versus tier 8 & 9... 

 

But when you look at these "buffed" pmm tanks,  most of them particularly the heavies even in their buffed state have penetration values that are inadequate versus even opposition tier 8 heavies let alone tier 9s...

 

225 pen for premium rounds (let alone the standard pen) on an IS6 is still woeful versus a Defender and similar opfor heavies.

 

This is where WG absolutely screwed the pooch in releasing tier 8 standard MM premiums with tier 9.5+ armour... in order to make pmm tier 8 heavies competitive vs those they need near tier 9 levels of pen, which then would make those tier 8 pmm tanks ridiculously OP when they face tier 7 and 6 tanks (assuming they ever fix the MM such that they ever see those tiers).

 

You can't just buff these in isolation and 'fix' the problem. You need to balance tanks at all tiers both in pmm and non pmm. For that to work you need to have the balls to nerf over-armoured tanks for their tiers and at least give them weak spots.


Edited by CardinalMite, 27 July 2018 - 06:26 AM.

“Holiday ops is balanced for Asia because a good player opening 11 boxes will get just as many decorations as a noob opening 75..”—.Murazor new head of global festive events.

FramFramson #36 Posted 27 July 2018 - 06:58 AM

    Major

  • Member
  • 38648 battles
  • 3,260
  • Member since:
    02-22-2015

To be fair, there's still a lot of tech tree T8s with 190-200mm ish standard pen and 230-ish gold pen. So I don't think the buffs are OUTRAGEOUSLY insufficient.

 

But yes, the biggest problem and what will make or break all this isn't the stats of PMM tanks. It's fixing the underlying MM.


LT-playing masochist. It's too much fun to be a mosquito.


Muds_Revenge #37 Posted 27 July 2018 - 07:13 AM

    Captain

  • Beta-Tester
  • 32476 battles
  • 1,014
  • [NZAD] NZAD
  • Member since:
    07-15-2012

Wow so my ridiculous and outlandish crazy mans claims of the 80% bottom tier in my tier 8 premium tanks was accurate?.

 

Can I take your tinfoil hat off now?.

 

 

 

 


 



 


eighty8 #38 Posted 27 July 2018 - 08:06 AM

    Private

  • Member
  • 31428 battles
  • 0
  • Member since:
    05-03-2013

Finally. WG admits that 3-5-7 has had horrendous consequences, with the worst consequences inflicted upon paying customers with garages full of tier 8 premiums. Not to mention all the other aspects of the game it wrecked for free and paying players alike. It even wrecked tier 10.  And it's going to take six months to fix - absolute garbage. I will continue to have a 'spending problem' for as long as WG continues to have a 'matchmaking problem'. I have not bought a tier 8 since last year, I avoid playing tier 8 at all costs, I am running a non-premium account for the first time since 2013, and I'm even reluctant to use consumables in battle because (unless my team is on the cusp of victory) I'd rather die than spend the 20k silver. That's how bitterly betrayed a lot of people feel.

The worst part is we've been telling you since April last year. And you did nothing until the player base went off a cliff (along with a large chunk of your revenue, I assume). Weapons grade stupidity    



stalozd #39 Posted 27 July 2018 - 08:13 AM

    Private

  • Member
  • 4359 battles
  • 0
  • Member since:
    04-19-2018
I think IS 6 need more penetration

Ezz #40 Posted 27 July 2018 - 08:43 AM

    How many flipping posts do I need to get past Major?

  • Beta-Tester
  • 64069 battles
  • 35,170
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    07-17-2012

View Poststalozd, on 27 July 2018 - 10:13 AM, said:

I think IS 6 need more penetration

 

The irony was that under the old MM it was considered a pretty strong tank. Template MM and only the die hards would even consider playing it. But hey, 7mm extra pen! \o/

Who the [edited] are you? Get Spoofed! "wouldn't be a proper WG balance change if they didn't [edited] something up after all "

>9000 cynicism brought to you by P2W, RIP Balance and the Cartoon Connection

Currently moderating your English speaking community : AALGMadibaCenturion_NZ, Elite911, Moonbase Patrol Copter 7

R. Pubbie: "why are all PBKAC players so rude, arrogant and nasty? and why do Mods favor them?"





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users