MatchMaking – My Response to WG

By Sliphantom

Thank’s to RSR discord chat for bringing this to our attention ahead if my normal cruise of the video channels. His previous video.

Liked it? Take a second to support jerryatrick53 on Patreon!
MatchMaking – My Response to WG

11 thoughts on “MatchMaking – My Response to WG

  1. Nobeer_ says:

    Spot on..
    I have played 21 fights with 2 as top tier and 3 as middle tier, that is actually making me considering to quit.. wonder how new players must feel..

  2. Snuble says:

    Don’t really care what time I am. What pisses me off is mainly two things. Skill imbalance and mismatched ht/mt. At least 80% off matches are so badly different in skill level that the outcome is given. The ht/mt thing feels more 50/50, and is more map depending. Combined it feels like 90% of matches would play out the same if you afk’ed or tried your hardest to carry.

  3. Vidar Hook says:

    The only point I don’t agree with would be the arty point, although this is mainly because of my resentment towards anyone who use xvm and thinks: “Making this guy’s game terrible probably benefits me in one way or another, so I’ll shoot absolutely nothing but him for the rest of the game.” and is allowed to do so since the class allows him to.

    But his response was spot on, and only forgot to cover one thing: Wargamings recent pathetic way of speaking to the community. They make up “lies” saying that this is what the community’s response has been regarding a particular topic. like “Your feedback has convinced us that the template-based algorithm does it’s job” or “Most players didn’t speak of the 62’s more heavily armored turret” both of which are technically true, but are utterly pathetic since most people don’t speak of the differences of the T-62A and Obj 140, so obviously most players won’t mention the differences and our feedback definitely suggested the new template worked as intended, but that does not mean that anyone wants it.

  4. bbmoose says:

    The matchmaking was fine after 9.18. A lot of two tier and one tier battles, which were awesome. After 9.18, every tier below 9 is not fun to play. Tier 8 got fucked up the most, the gap between tier 8 and 9 is simply to big.

    1. Lord Sky Fury says:

      Yep. One tier and two tier battles was a lot of fun. I dont know why they had to reduce it… I think it was big mistake.

    2. Seth says:

      “The matchmaking was fine after 9.18…. After 9.18, every tier below 9 is not fun to play. Tier 8 got fucked up the most, the gap between tier 8 and 9 is simply to big.”

      Ummmm…. what? So is it fine or not after 9.18?

  5. JD says:

    According to the post-Ranked Battles report,

    they want to fix the MM in Ranked Battles due to the imbalances of HT-MTs….

    a rough list of areas for future improvements:

    Vehicle types: The matchmaker ensured the difference in the number of arty, LTs and
    TDs within each part of the list was one vehicle at the most, but didn’t mirror the teams
    by the number of medium and heavy tanks. It often led to frustrating scenarios when
    you would end up with on a team full of heavies, facing a team with a majority of
    medium tanks. Of course, it left you with a larger HP pool, but the opposition had better
    chances at victory regardless, as they were faster and more maneuverable. This
    caused annoyance for a number of players, and we’ll ensure it doesn’t happen next

    Now, if they only had some interest in fixing this issue in Random battles, as well.

  6. Seth says:

    WG, if you truly “aspire to build a truly fair” and “balanced” experience, you have to include player skill in MM. How is it “fair” or “balanced” if you have new players, or even crap players, that either rushed up the tiers or bought a premium tank facing unicorns even in the exact same tank? You need to add tiering of players based on skill and use that in MM also.

Leave a Reply