How can anybody get good at any game when the parameters are always moving?
1 Like
Yep, after the n-th time you relearn something and it changes again, you just stop caring. I used to play planes, tanks and navy, but now just stick to naval, so I waste less time readjusting and relearning when they screw up something… and you can be certain, the screwups will continue. It’s just sad naval mode is getting infected as well. Looks like they are trying hard to make me stop playing.
2 Likes
I think most of us are just waiting for something better to come along but sadly film and game makers just seem to be stupid
For me, I’m not looking for anything new to start playing. I’m fine playing some Age Of Empires II or Bejeweled 3 lol.
I was on about a successor to War Thunder as it has so many faults now.
I try disable like /dislike maps and see if something change but no, just another day witht he same trash broken and stupid map rotation.
The same stupid maps over and over and over again.
1 Like
I dont get the issue…the above distribution can be the effect of OTHER players preferences…maps that most players have on “like” will appear more…maps that most players have on “dislike” will appear less.
I actually have Maginot on like…and it is a frequently praised map…
Gaijin will on occasion increase the odds of some map and/or remove maps from rotation…not saying otherwise…i admit Seversk is a bit odd…perhaps players like it more than i thought…or Gaijin is pushing it a bit…
BUT…what you present seems ok to me. A “normal” rotation would only be possible WITHOUT player preferences…even if you remove your own. And even in this scenario…RNG happens…you need more than 250 events for an analysis.
If anything, you proved most maps appear in your rotations with a “reasonable” probability :) IMHO
2 Likes
It seems more a mechanic to punish players for leaving maps early. In AB it is FAR more strict about it and will basically force you. I’ve been through 5 lineups at various (higher, lower) BRs to finally avoid one crap single cap 1 lane COD map.
In RB it’s usually easier but can still have same behaviour. They really want you to pay for premium you see, so you can ban that single map type and get stuck with the other slight variation instead.
I thought only dislike changes the odds of the map appearing and liking is just for statistics
I want the same big map options (longer queue, bring it on for actually fun games) and SBMM for WW2 BRs. The map selection is pathetic in this game and the worst maps of any game I’ve played in 30 years are just getting worse.
It’s a slow frog boil that is frustrating and pushes me away from the game more often.
1 Like
Strangely, I used to hate the old vietnam. I found by liking it, I almost never saw it again, same with fire arc (absolute AIDS in AB) xD
So if it does do anything, it’s the opposite?
Wouldn’t be to surprising actually
Recently I had decided to play 25 ground matches/day and record the maps I got along with my personal rankings out of 10 for how much I enjoy them.
I was on day 4 or 5 and my average was about a 2 or 3/10 when I deleted the Excel sheet and I have since then played this game much less.
I seem to be in the minority(apparently) of players who don’t like tiny maps(600m x 1200m Alaska for example) and that seems to be what Greedjin likes to design their maps around.
This would be fine if they allowed you to opt out. Personally I’d rather have 20 minute que times than get stuck in some of these maps.
I asked myself, why buy premiums or premium account when Greedjin gives 0 control over the largest variable effecting gameplay, maps.
1 Like
SBMM is awful, and will never work in war thunder.
1 Like
Yeah, not a fan of Alaska (which shows up a LOT) and would prefer a longer que to have better map rotation. Getting Stalingrad a lot as well, and don’t like it either.
“Random” is NOT the same as “evenly spread”.
Random means you do get clusters and “empty spaces”, and it is a common misconception that a cluster “proves it isn’t random”.
This is (more or less) what you expect from “random” - with some empty spaces and some clusters:
This is more “even spread” - very few clusters…:
1 Like
It annoys me that my statement about random not being as random as people think got removed by someone in the moderator role…
Just getting stupid to be being reported for putting out straight out fact.
You are correct, i have worded my post a bit badly.
The below image shows what a “good” match maker should aim for, and it is definitly mathematically possible to code a methode that acieves this. Even a beginner programmer could do something like this.