Jump to content

[Discussion] Balance, Bias, Matchmaking and Battle Ratings


Problem is, if a vehicle is not being used correctly, or let me say, efficiently - it will tend to drop in BR - BUT, if it is enough of a problem for many players (here and in game) then it can be "adjusted". These vehicles are "Trophy tanks, if you get my meaning and yes, new players will strive towards them asap. With time they will settle in to a position until the next bunch of new guys destroys the "image" of them. Best solution, talk to the WTPC, garner support in a reasonable manner and Our BR heroes (+smin) will cogitate , ruminate and recommend to Moscow. (I thought you were a plane guy anyway????)

 

Okay. As a whole the BRs are pretty good at the moment, only a few vehicles really stand out as having gotten the short end of the stick (M36 comes to mind straight away). It's just the damage models that irk me, how many shots it can take to kill a tank sometimes.

 

 

 

Nah, not really a plane guy at the moment in WT, at least since tanks came out. Ground out all the famous WW2 planes and got up to late tier 4 where the grind really begins to pick up. That, and I mainly played RB, which is so climbing-centric that it began to get quite boring. 

 

My favourite plane matches were the historical match-ups that appeared in the Events sometimes, like Guardian Angel with the high spawn. Otherwise it's usually just take off, climb for 10 minutes, have a couple dogfights and get shot down.

Edited by ReachForTheSky
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No - the matching is done on the Tier and BR rating. Performance is only relevant before the "Announced BR Changes" and not used on the fly with matching.

 

Scarper how about this you said on june 2014...did it change since then?  it does not apply any more? Bcasue i´m constantly tiered up against +1br

 

 

Hi guys,
 
After taking into consideration your concerns, we have decided to reduce the player efficiency influence on the battle ratings calculations. Previously, the Battle Rating could be reduced for players who showed an efficiency below average. These players in some cases could be balanced to a low-rank battle with a high-rank vehicle - their effective Battle Rating could exceed the permissible difference of 1 to 1.3 BR.

 

We’ve made a few changes to matchmakingBattle efficiency doesn’t change a player’s Battle Rating now and is only valid for searching of an appropriate session for the player, by matching him against players of comparable efficiency. Thus,less efficient players (on the wins-to-defeats ratio) will no longer be joining with stronger vehicles, but rather be fighting with similar vehicles in battles of comparable efficient players.

 

 

https://forum.warthu...and-mm-changes/

 

 

We’ve made a few changes to matchmaking. Battle efficiency doesn’t change a player’s Battle Rating now and is only valid for searching of an appropriate session for the player, by matching him against players of comparable efficiency. Thus, less efficient players (on the wins-to-defeats ratio) will no longer be joining with stronger vehicles, but rather be fighting with similar vehicles in battles of comparable efficient players.

 

[...] These players in some cases could be balanced to a low-rank battle with a high-rank vehicle - their effective Battle Rating could exceed the permissible difference of 1 to 1.3 BR.

Edited by Airbeast
  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scarper how about this you said on june 2014...did it change since then?  it does not apply any more? Bcasue i´m constantly tiered up against +1br

 

 

Hi guys,
 
After taking into consideration your concerns, we have decided to reduce the player efficiency influence on the battle ratings calculations. Previously, the Battle Rating could be reduced for players who showed an efficiency below average. These players in some cases could be balanced to a low-rank battle with a high-rank vehicle - their effective Battle Rating could exceed the permissible difference of 1 to 1.3 BR.

 

We’ve made a few changes to matchmakingBattle efficiency doesn’t change a player’s Battle Rating now and is only valid for searching of an appropriate session for the player, by matching him against players of comparable efficiency. Thus,less efficient players (on the wins-to-defeats ratio) will no longer be joining with stronger vehicles, but rather be fighting with similar vehicles in battles of comparable efficient players.

 

It's a fair point - however -

 

My original post taken from the Russian news was dated - Posted 06 June 2014 - 02:45 PM

 

Todace post quoted in this topic and the previous one. - Posted 22 July 2014 - 08:32 PM

 

 

Matching occurs only based on the BR and the vehicle rank

 

It is easy to lose the plot with the changes going on so it is understandable - Goodness knows we confuse ourselves sometimes 8)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Matching occurs only based on the BR and the vehicle rank

 

 

 

 

Although the Battle Rating (BR) system has issues - I can understand why it is needed. And truthfully, BR works well within Ranks 1, 2 and 3. However, once you enter Rank 4 - things begin to degrade in my honest opinion

 

And here's why they degrade: except for Rank 5, every other Rank can be up-tiered.

 

This is a serious problem if you are a new player that just unlocked his/hers first Rank 4 vehicle - this is very frustrating (especially in Ground Forces).

 

I understand Cold War Era vehicles are in place, and are not going away anytime soon. However, such vehicles need to be in their own separate Rank.

 

So if you really wish to improve upon the Matchmaking experience - then introduce a new Rank where Cold War Era vehicles can be placed.

Edited by Major_Flisk
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should this be possible?

 

[spoiler]nx1LiCR.png[/spoiler]

 

As you can see, we didn't have a single 8.0 plane, yet, the enemy team had two F2H-2 Banshees, which are 8.0.

 

Things like this^^

[spoiler]

post-330616-0-84055600-1442037871.gif

[/spoiler]

 

Which brings up the point that the teams would be more balanced (and historical) by making it so that players can only pick from a limited # of roles. 

 

Say in EC-Mode battles each team can only field a limited number of each type of unit:

 

Aircraft:

--- 13 bombers

--- 18 fighters

--- 12 attackers

 

Ground Units:

--- 20 medium tanks

--- 15 heavy tanks

--- 23 light tanks/armored cars/SPAAGs

 

Here's how it might work in-game (at least in Squad Tournaments or WW-Mode w/ auto-squadding):

[spoiler]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iDEeINmidw&index=1&list=PLL7yuIe6OBXwCQciztx79xyLWtTL9FDY7

[/spoiler]

 

A pre-set # of roles would not only make the MM more efficient (shorter waiting times), but also eliminates the issue of vehicle "spamming" and makes for more realistic/historical teams.

Edited by Results45
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

victory or loss are really really seldomly reflected in individual performance no matter what faction or BR.

 

i could show you funny screenshots where i have 15+ kills and #2,3 in team have 1 kill or nene even, the rest of my team is on 0:3 and we get totally annihilated of course.

no matter how well or bad you do, if you get a potato camper team the match is already decided before it starts ;)

  • Upvote 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My concerns on balancing at the moment is the value of playing axis in EC particularly rank V. A typical game goes as follows:
[spoiler]
At the start:

Axis: He 162s and Me 262s. Those who choose to use a 262 A/1a especially will need to destroy more targets because he used up some spawning points. Apparently the Arado C with 20mm MG151s is a good cheap (SL-wise) alternative but is a big fat juicy target to hit and costs some spawn points.

 

Allies: B29 bombers going to the axis base and J-ing out because its more "economically efficient" rate-wise for earning SL for them to do so. Could easily be fixed by increasing their spawn costs or giving them the 4 minute wait penalty.

Fighters typically choose the F8F or the P-80A-5 or the F84B-26 thunderjet, or the Tempest...

Tempests and F8F bearcats can take down Me 262s and He 162s which are persistant enough to try to take down the props without running away, and the superprops are a little slow in the cruise but it isn't that difficult to take down a 262 or 162, but the german jets struggle to maintain their energy (poor thrust/weight ratio and overheating potential) and they have a hard time shooting down nimble props so their best tactic is to ambush the unexpected planes. Dodging an ambush is easy thanks to the ever realistic engine sounds of other aircraft being head in flight and the slow velocity of mk103s.

 

U.S. players have quite a variety but their BR 8.0 aircraft are inferior to the Ho 229 which the Germans can get a hold of fairly easily.
Brittish tempest player needs one kill (can be anything including AA) and he's got the whole meteor range excluding mk 8. Provided Germans don't have the Ho229 or Me 163, they're screwed.

Germany can get Mig15s after 4 or so kills, but the Mig15 is really only useful at tacking B29s (which Me 262s are good at) and performing suprise attacks on meteors. It is inferior to good pilots in sea meteor or more advance meteors and the venom (Because of their awesome performance with the only things the redline speed limit limiting them) and the venom is extremely hard to shoot down. The mig15 is good at chasing down the Hawker Hunter though, however even the He 162 can do that when the Hawker Hunter has no room left to run.

 

Hawker hunter just takes out early axis jets but doesn't really have a proper role other than that.

 

U.S. gets F2 sabre after two bearcat kills, Axis will get dominated more provided they don't have the mig15bis or Cl-13.

 

You could say that EC is basically a game of chess, except that axis only gets knights while Allies gets rooks and bishops, and axis will need to pawn their way accross the board to get upgrades while allies only need to take out one pawn to get the dominating rook. Allies also have the B29 bomber pawns which pretty much end up in a 95% chance of allied victory but they are Axis' best way of earning spawn points.

In short:

BR 6.3-7.0: About equal. Germans struggle to get their next upgrade due to spawn point spending on these jets and having no BR 6.0 aircraft available. U.S. no longer has its korean war AD-2 striker aircraft either, but they have the B29 spam which feeds the axis their advance aircraft. Brittish kind of struggle to get their first kill thanks to no availability of BR 7.0 aircraft.
BR 8.0: Germany can win if they obtain a horten, else they succumb to the meteors. U.S. struggles.
BR 9.0: Germany is pretty much screwed.

After everyone loses their BR 8.0 and 9.0 upgrades, they leave the game. EC becomes boring because you spend too much time going in circles finding people and bots are bugged and stuck on the runway so it might as well become a free flight session with super-easy grinding for B29 pilots.

[/spoiler]

 

 

Aircraft:

--- 13 bombers

--- 18 fighters

--- 12 attackers

Who the heck plays attackers these days? Ever since the ground forces came in, a few months after that they made it impossible to spot certain ground targets beyond something like 0.9 km which gives heavy attackers like the IL-2 which may have a hard time turning with all its payload, a hard time keeping track of where the tank is simply because it turns wider than the game allows the plane to turn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who the heck plays attackers these days? Ever since the ground forces came in, a few months after that they made it impossible to spot certain ground targets beyond something like 0.9 km which gives heavy attackers like the IL-2 which may have a hard time turning with all its payload, a hard time keeping track of where the tank is simply because it turns wider than the game allows the plane to turn.

 

Maybe not so much right now, but the limited battle role availability I was talking about was in the context of EC-Mode & WW-Mode where you would need attackers to carry-out CAS missions. 

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just asking... why the king tiger still have his 0.85 modifier at the armor? It was already proved thousands of times that it shouldn t be there. Even the book that gaijin say to use about ballistics, WWII ballistics armour and gunnery say that Edited by bellezza03
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Na, you're just bad. Had you selected a 5.0-6.0 Soviet lineup you'd win with your eyes closed. T-54's are excellent but that's the most likely BR range for Soviets to lose. 

 

You could have picked any of the T-34's (all of which are grossly over performing both in terms of shell penetration/filler and armor), and it'd essentially be impossible for you to lose. 

Edited by Russian_Tears
  • Upvote 4
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wished I'd taken screen shots of the games I lost while having 12 kills.

And of the games I've won where I quit a map start (Rhine lags map) and thus did nothing.

I think MM uses the same RNG code that's in the damage model.

 

Think my record is like 10 kills and 4 captures in a poland map, and still the loss.  The multi caps was the heartbreaker, so makes it not surprising folks leave (especially when camped) to start the queue for the next one (and save on potentially crazy repair costs).

Edited by Bunnymanxx
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could have picked any of the T-34's (all of which are grossly over performing both in terms of shell penetration/filler and armor), and it'd essentially be impossible for you to lose. 

 

So, balance is tipped towards Soviets in T-34 line and towards Germany in Leopard line, or some other line.

 

All in all, isn't that yet another kind of balance?

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, balance is tipped towards Soviets in T-34 line and towards Germany in Leopard line, or some other line.

 

All in all, isn't that yet another kind of balance?

Considering that there's one Leopard 1 at a BR range that is never achieved by the vast majority of players, and over half a dozen T-34's in game, all spread out through a wide range of BR's which all avoid the dreaded 8.0 BR ranking and all dominate at their respective tiers. No I wouldn't call that another kind of balance

  • Upvote 4
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Balance in this game is achieved by the player, not his vehicle. Use your strengths against your opponents weaknesses and you should have no issues. The only bias in this game is the baggage the individual player brings into the game. 

 

For me, BR # is a made up number used by weak players to explain poor play. Especially in the air. If you find yourself in a situation you cannot handle alone, my suggestion would be... bring a wing man. There is not one...OMG OP UBER vehicle in this game. Just players that do not take the time to learn the little nuances of this game. 

 

There are some vehicles that were purposely built to fight a specific enemy. Do not be surprised if they do not match up well against other vehicles or allies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Balance in this game is achieved by the player, not his vehicle. Use your strengths against your opponents weaknesses and you should have no issues. The only bias in this game is the baggage the individual player brings into the game. 

 

For me, BR # is a made up number used by weak players to explain poor play. Especially in the air. If you find yourself in a situation you cannot handle alone, my suggestion would be... bring a wing man. There is not one...OMG OP UBER vehicle in this game. Just players that do not take the time to learn the little nuances of this game. 

whilst i agree for the most part sometimes a plane is just completely outclassed by Ie F4u1c, Firebrandetc  or just absolutely superior to its contemporaries (j2m2)

 

this argument falls apart in TV too with a 1944 Meteor fighting a 1952 MIG

Edited by Bringo_Gaboso

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering that there's one Leopard 1 at a BR range that is never achieved by the vast majority of players, and over half a dozen T-34's in game, all spread out through a wide range of BR's which all avoid the dreaded 8.0 BR ranking and all dominate at their respective tiers. No I wouldn't call that another kind of balance

I take it this is in AB or maybe RB? I can assure you that it certainly not the case in SB, especially with T-34-85'S Tigers and Panthers wreck those things and any of the long 75 Pz IV's have little issue IF you get the first hit in.
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I take it this is in AB or maybe RB? I can assure you that it certainly not the case in SB, especially with T-34-85'S Tigers and Panthers wreck those things and any of the long 75 Pz IV's have little issue IF you get the first hit in.

Who the hell even plays SB anymore? The events are so unbalanced and so infrequent it's not worth mentioning. RB right now is the de facto game mode for Ground Forces and T-34's just pub stomp everywhere there. 

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • _Catweazle_63 changed the title to [Discussion] Balance, Bias, Matchmaking and Battle Ratings
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...