Jump to content


XP based Balance of matches ? thoughts

balance queue match maker

  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

losttwo #1 Posted 09 April 2015 - 01:18 PM

    which way do we go?

  • Community Ace
  • 5412 battles
  • 13,980
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    05-15-2012

You will see many threads about BALANCE in matches.

Lets look at one of the major factors that affect balance.

 

Experience or player skill is a major contributing factor of match balance.

Likewise many of the gained  pilot perks and consumables / additions add a great deal to

in game performance.

 

Wargaming has designed a game system of matching players versus players that takes no skill into account.

Thus leaving an individual player at the mercy of RANDOM encounters.

You will face an enemy that may have 1 game to any number of games played with in a base population of 1000 players.

 

Is it fair that a person of 500 battles be pitted against a player with 4000 battles ?  Probably not.

The player with the fewer battles is still learning the nuances of the game and the plane choice.

 

This is where population is a major contributing factor. Where as the low population increases you chances

of encountering more skilled players all the while a higher population tends to level the playing field.

 

As population increases there is a wider range of choices from which the Match Maker can select players.

 

What about a skill based match maker ? Should Wargaming consider this option ?

 

How exactly would you define a skilled based system.

Would you base it on overall games played or over games played in a particular plane.

 

If one based a skilled based match maker on over all games played the population of friendly versus enemy would be limited.

Thus placing a strain on Match Maker to determine matches and increasing queue time exponentially.

Looking at games played and designing a match maker on that system would alienate several players from others.

20K + there are only 18 players ( win rate range from 41% to 67% )

10K+ there are only 280 players ( 197 players between 10K to 15K )

 

With in the 10K to 15K game range the Win rate percentage itself ranges from 44% to 79%

 

So the games played method would still have people crying about unbalanced matches.

While complaining about the increase in queue times to gain matches.

 

What about a Win Rate % skill based match maker ?

75%+ there are only 35 players that would be matched together in battle

65% - 75% is 115 +/-

60%- 65%  is  300 +/-

This again would limit the queue and increase times for waiting on queue.

 

One of the major set backs is the various times that people play the game.

After all, everyone one of us have real lives that effect when we can play.

Like wise the choice of tier and plane being of great effect as well.

 

How do you balance a match out of random games while still maintaining speed of battle ?



losttwo #2 Posted 09 April 2015 - 01:20 PM

    which way do we go?

  • Community Ace
  • 5412 battles
  • 13,980
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    05-15-2012

My opinion about considering any sort of skill based match maker is that it will not work effectively.

Nor will it create a balance of matches due to peoples random lives.



DrSinister #3 Posted 09 April 2015 - 01:27 PM

    High-Tech Medic

  • -Community Ace-
  • 121 battles
  • 4,224
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

Why be one thing??  WG already has Personal Rating implemented, which to some feels is not the most accurate as a rating system, but its still a rating of a player.  WG then could just use that to determine how to group players.

 

Granted even with that and like you stated above this will cause the MM to take longer to get a more balanced battle.

 

Yes, there are a lot of PvP oriented games out there that uses a Rating system in a ELO fashion.

 

Problem I think here would still be population.  The low population with an ELO system would make the MM take longer to put a battle together. 



losttwo #4 Posted 09 April 2015 - 01:37 PM

    which way do we go?

  • Community Ace
  • 5412 battles
  • 13,980
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    05-15-2012

Yes Doc population is the biggest problem.

Still trying to come up with a feasible suggestion on how to fix that one.

And I am still trying to figure out how the personal rating system works.


Edited by losttwo, 09 April 2015 - 01:38 PM.


MARS_REVENANT #5 Posted 09 April 2015 - 01:50 PM

    Colonel

  • Community Ace
  • 5674 battles
  • 9,468
  • [WG-CA] WG-CA
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
All they need to do is balance planes and flights "plane" and simple.

1.9.x Forum Stats: Colonel; Member; 34638 battles; 7,526 message_img.pngMember since: 11-03-2014

I never lose; either I win or I learn.

TWITCH  |  YOUTUBE  |  FACEBOOK  |  TWITTER


losttwo #6 Posted 09 April 2015 - 01:56 PM

    which way do we go?

  • Community Ace
  • 5412 battles
  • 13,980
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    05-15-2012

View PostTHEMARCO1979, on 09 April 2015 - 08:50 AM, said:

All they need to do is balance planes and flights "plane" and simple.

 

what do you suggest ?  only BF 109's versus BF 109's

In the reality of war that battles were never balanced of equal plane fighting equal planes.

Why do it in a RANDOM game where people get to choose what they fly and enter battle.



broslicer #7 Posted 09 April 2015 - 03:57 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 149 battles
  • 1,490
  • Member since:
    07-22-2013

View Postlosttwo, on 09 April 2015 - 07:56 AM, said:

In the reality of war that battles were never balanced of equal plane fighting equal planes.

here's my thought Mr. losttwo... you seem to keep comparing everything to what happened, this is a game. If you care so much about war... join the military or play WT (which I realize you wont do either, which is fine lol) . This is an arcade flight simulator and should be treated as such.... or at least that is how I see it.

 

Full respect to ya, but you gotta stop comparing this game to real life "my main man":honoring:

 

What I believe how to fix it: Like mentioned above, the biggest problem is POPULATION, once that is fixed PR's and other things (plane balance on each side), could maybe be put into the MM, but for now the focus for WG should be getting population up, whether by advertisement, fixing bugs in the game, or game events (clan wars, tournaments, interaction with community in game, not forums. though interaction is good in the forum, but there should be much more interaction in game)

 

 


 

                                     

 


MARS_REVENANT #8 Posted 09 April 2015 - 04:02 PM

    Colonel

  • Community Ace
  • 5674 battles
  • 9,468
  • [WG-CA] WG-CA
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

1. flight vs flight (flight waits till another flight joins)

2. tier vs tier and flight type vs flight type (plane type is also considered, i.e. flight of fighters does not go against flight of GA)

3. plane type vs plane type (equal GA, LF, HF, and MR on each site)

4. plane performance vs plane performance (equal high, mid and low alt fighters on each side)

 

1 being least restrictive and can be accomplished with current population. 4 being most restrictive and can only be accomplished once population supports it.


Edited by THEMARCO1979, 09 April 2015 - 04:02 PM.

1.9.x Forum Stats: Colonel; Member; 34638 battles; 7,526 message_img.pngMember since: 11-03-2014

I never lose; either I win or I learn.

TWITCH  |  YOUTUBE  |  FACEBOOK  |  TWITTER


Topsight #9 Posted 09 April 2015 - 04:08 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 2,624
  • [-ES-] -ES-
  • Member since:
    12-07-2013
I think the only plausible solution at this juncture is for the population to increase to a much larger size and in the meantime it is up to experienced players to help those with less experience along during a battle. Making suggestions for order of a certain battle, for example.  Watching a match when you are out and offering a suggestion if needed to help them along; but some will listen and some will not. I will have to think more on this and see if there is a better way.

 


BrushWolf #10 Posted 09 April 2015 - 04:09 PM

    Major

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 80 battles
  • 5,907
  • [GWG] GWG
  • Member since:
    06-11-2012
Any "skill" based balancing of matches should only happen after the MM has selected the players for the match by shifting players so the teams have reasonably close "skill" by whatever metric is used. The same for flights, if there is more than one they should be split between the teams as evenly as possible.

I used to have a handle on life until it broke off.

                             

 

“The church is near but the road is icy, the tavern is far away but I will walk carefully”

Russian Proverb

 


ArrowZ_ #11 Posted 09 April 2015 - 04:16 PM

    Captain

  • Open Beta Tester
  • 1049 battles
  • 3,274
  • Member since:
    08-04-2013

Its very interesting that when these MM threads pop up in the forum news feed, all supposed possibilities in the OP content is considered yet one is countlessly overlooked. Even the title in this thread hints on what will make the MM successful given the right amount of population to support it. Which really is a sad dissapointing fact about this region isn't it. Not having enough to fulfil a 15v15 let alone trying to 'balance' them.

 

Total experience, Average experience & the already discussed personal ratings. These are the ideal stats for the perfectly skilled MM that we all dream to have. But like every god damn MM thread, the solutions are hindered under one futile fact: The lack in population in NA.

 

You know what would be a much better topic to talk about? Suggesting ways to improve our population. It would be interesting to read the kind of suggestions the people in these forums will give in the subject of population growth. Don't you agree? Might give insight to WG in what they need to do to [edit] save this game from its miserable state.

 

Sorry if I seem negative and cynical. I'm just tired of all the [edited]from this company. Hope you enjoy my addition to this MM thread. 

 

Want my opinion? Don't bother.


That Ozi Client Side Lagger


Tonzzo #12 Posted 09 April 2015 - 04:25 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 702 battles
  • 3,052
  • Member since:
    11-14-2013

Balance with no population ='s long wait times and cuses MORE POPULATION LOSSES....

Leaving the games MM the way it is cuases small unrewarding battles that does little to increase the population....


 

Call me a old fart but I remember the days of 15 v 15 battles.....  This game would thrive with those kinds of battles....  Oh well I could just play battle vr's bots....  Those guys are better then most pubbies.....  :P


 



 


Oldprop #13 Posted 09 April 2015 - 04:27 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 68
  • Member since:
    01-16-2013

Yet another "same old-same old" useless diatribe. The only hope for this type of game is for some very computer saavy air-combat programmers to do a real life eval. of the MMO's now available, & attempt to take the best of each & determine if it is feasible at all. With the advancements of CGI & computing power today, there doesn't appear to be a demand by the NA consumer to develop such a game. It is quite evident that the RU conglomerate has not the faintest comprehension of a true combat gaming environment. Face it...you're all stuck with this slug.

 

Op


***  "A mans' word is his honor.....without honor, there is nothing."  ***

***  I have no hesitation to kill nor reservation to die for the Constitution & Flag of the USA.  ***


losttwo #14 Posted 09 April 2015 - 04:46 PM

    which way do we go?

  • Community Ace
  • 5412 battles
  • 13,980
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    05-15-2012

Broslicer, I did my stint in the U.S. Army served my time for this country.

I do play play tanks just not that often, doesn't keep my interest up.

 

This is a game no doubt about that and having played several strategy ( before computers )   games though out my growth.

The fact remains that none of them placed equal force against equal force. Be it Squad leader, Luftwaffe, Harpoon or many others.

 

People choose to fly a plane and it is placed into a match with no account of the opposing plane

Therefore in battle you may chose a BF-109G and be pitted against the same.

Like wise you may choose a Yak-9 and face an F7F.

That is were brains over comes just rushing in and shooting stuff.

 

One may always remind us that this is a game yet we cry out for BALANCE.

To balance aircraft versus aircraft or skill against skill.

 

Unwilling to face a possible stronger force in exchange for equality.

Unwilling to try a different tactic and as the underdog pull out a victory.

 

Arrow is correct in that we need to focus our attention on population and retention.

If Wargaming would advertise across more media lines that Discovery channel or The American Hero Channel ( Military channel )

perhaps then an increase would happen overnight.

Advisement across multi-genre channels would have a large impact on population growth.

 

Like wise I am sure that there would be more 15 vs 15 matches if people would place self limits on the tiers they fly.

Think of the possibility if everyone queued in with tier 6 while 400 people are online.

The fact of the matter is out of 400 people they will chose differently.

 

Wargaming has there design in place with the way BALANCE of matches go.

Despite the many post asking for the contrary the fact remains this is a random system.

There is no way to control what planes are chosen at any particular time.

From plane type to tier ( 2 tier spread ) flight or no flight.

That is the balance of the matches.

It is the people and the chose they make.

How they fly with in the match and if they learn.

That is the balance, win or lose.

 

In the meantime people will remember the losses then complain about unfair unbalanced matches.

How many of you complain on the forums because you ( or the plane )  are OP and pub stomping everyone.

How many of you bring the burden of proof thru wins rather than loss.

 

 


Edited by losttwo, 09 April 2015 - 04:47 PM.


dityboycom #15 Posted 09 April 2015 - 05:05 PM

    Colonel

  • Member
  • 1 battle
  • 9,287
  • [BAGG] BAGG
  • Member since:
    08-23-2014

View PostDrSinister, on 09 April 2015 - 09:27 AM, said:

Why be one thing??  WG already has Personal Rating implemented, which to some feels is not the most accurate as a rating system, but its still a rating of a player.  WG then could just use that to determine how to group players.

 

Granted even with that and like you stated above this will cause the MM to take longer to get a more balanced battle.

 

Yes, there are a lot of PvP oriented games out there that uses a Rating system in a ELO fashion.

 

Problem I think here would still be population.  The low population with an ELO system would make the MM take longer to put a battle together. 

 

Well, people fail to realize the PR is built around the way WG wishes their players to play the game. Not the way the NA market has decided to weigh their own statistics. There is a drastic difference in Hryuno ratings and the PR, mostly because win rate is the be all for a marker of success in this game to the majority of the population. Unfortunately, win rate means very little because if you take some of the players with the highest win rates in this game and put them in a T8 battle against guys with 60% win rates they will get obliterated.

 

I think the PR is a good way to balance the game if they care so much to do so. It is the fair WG way to separate by skill, all other opinions on "skill" is subjective to the opinionated individual.



ArrowZ_ #16 Posted 09 April 2015 - 05:18 PM

    Captain

  • Open Beta Tester
  • 1049 battles
  • 3,274
  • Member since:
    08-04-2013

View Postlosttwo, on 10 April 2015 - 02:16 AM,

Like wise I am sure that there would be more 15 vs 15 matches if people would place self limits on the tiers they fly.

Think of the possibility if everyone queued in with tier 6 while 400 people are online.

You wouldn't be the first to suggest this and certainly won't be the last. Its actually a great solution. Marcos weekly tier gatherings was evidence to this. The MM worked as it was intended when a specific tier was flooded of players. If people in this community could continue this example on a weekly basis, I'm sure it would grab more and more peoples attention to join in this community created event. All it takes is one person to make a difference and he did.


That Ozi Client Side Lagger


Topsight #17 Posted 09 April 2015 - 06:16 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 2,624
  • [-ES-] -ES-
  • Member since:
    12-07-2013

I believe the biggest draw in the beginning when the ads hit the media, mainly televison, people were awestruck by the graphics they saw concerning the war birds; I know I was. I never played online pvp games before but then I'm from the older generation. Maybe, so many new people, who saw the ads jumped right in because of what they saw; a chance to fly a high quality war bird even if it was virtual. Maybe so many of them never played or only dabbled in online gaming before. In fact for myself, it was the only draw that got me into this site.

 

Hindsight is 20-20 and what happened is what happened. In the meantime I said earlier in this thread that population growth is what we need again and that "we" the exp players should do all we can to lend advice and not to hold back from it to less experienced players. If and this is a big "if" we can grow the player base again, we should remember the mistakes of the past and I'm of the opinion that balance should be a starting point and go from there based on what the new larger base wants to do. Sending survey links via a players personal email could go a long way in securing a base that stays the course.


Edited by Topsight, 09 April 2015 - 06:30 PM.

 


losttwo #18 Posted 09 April 2015 - 06:28 PM

    which way do we go?

  • Community Ace
  • 5412 battles
  • 13,980
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    05-15-2012

I agree completely Topsight.

The advertisements is what got me into this mess. The graphics, the game play, the difference away from simulator.

As the game grew and changed it was getting better up until 1.5

No clue what Wargaming did since 1.5 to present but they certainly have not improved GAME PLAY.

From hangar load times to FPS drops.

Who would actually bother staying if they have no time and money invested.



Topsight #19 Posted 09 April 2015 - 06:49 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 2,624
  • [-ES-] -ES-
  • Member since:
    12-07-2013
One last item I have concerning the dilemma "we, the player base" are in. The two tier spread must remain and not return to the one tier spread.

 


MARS_REVENANT #20 Posted 09 April 2015 - 06:49 PM

    Colonel

  • Community Ace
  • 5674 battles
  • 9,468
  • [WG-CA] WG-CA
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostArrowZ_, on 09 April 2015 - 12:18 PM, said:

You wouldn't be the first to suggest this and certainly won't be the last. Its actually a great solution. Marcos weekly tier gatherings was evidence to this. The MM worked as it was intended when a specific tier was flooded of players. If people in this community could continue this example on a weekly basis, I'm sure it would grab more and more peoples attention to join in this community created event. All it takes is one person to make a difference and he did.

 

you just hit me right in the feels.... the problem is when they cam out with the new MM it would snag a 3v3 match right away, instead of waiting 15 seconds and starting a full battle. Many times with flight v no flight.  I have been meaning to start up the count-ins again, I'll give it a shot.

1.9.x Forum Stats: Colonel; Member; 34638 battles; 7,526 message_img.pngMember since: 11-03-2014

I never lose; either I win or I learn.

TWITCH  |  YOUTUBE  |  FACEBOOK  |  TWITTER






Also tagged with balance, queue, match maker

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users