Where is the fruit of having a highly skilled team when you’re up against an entirely casual one? Where is the satisfaction of an easy win?
When matches are solely against people of your skill level, it not only creates a illusion of winnability which is highly motivating but also highlights the true value of the battle. There’s no ambiguity about whether I won because my opponent didn’t know how to play or because I am simply better
Where is the incentive for better players to improve even further if they play against weaker opponents?
Good players fighting bad players create an incentive to learn. Those bad players learn lessons and become good players which the good players fight to create better players. This is how jobs work…
There’s a difference between balancing a team and SBMM. Don’t confuse the two.
And does ranked system not do the same?
You get incentivized to improve by playing against similarly skilled opponents, and so you look for ways to beat them better. Rinse and repeat.
Are you forgetting lineups exist?
Two players with the exact same skill in a “SBMM” scenario with one having a full lineup at a BR and the other without would destroy the concept of balancing them based on player performance immediately.
But I thought this is about incentive to improve?
This isn’t one or the other. Building a stable lineup is just one side of improving your abilities.
Lmao, I’m done.
Whatever you say man.
Well, we’re discussing the basic principles of the system. I don’t have information on how it was specifically applied in Call of Duty, where perhaps, due to certain features of the game, it could have been susceptible to abuse by players. In other games, and based on my experience, it has worked quite well and without controversy about it. See League of Legends…
Not to burst your bubble, but League of Legends is a game you get made fun of for playing because it’s really not that good either.
And I’m a former player of that game.
Besides that, you can’t look at a player’s performance alone for War Thunder. Lineups exist and a player with a bigger lineup will always have the upper hand compared to someone who doesn’t regardless of if they have the same skill or not.
I agree that Gaijin could do better at balancing the game, but that has to come from fixing battle ratings and issues with certain nations overperforming against everyone else.
A USSR player will consistently perform better in a match compared to if they played the same BR in a different nation. You can’t use SBMM to fix that.
From my pov you still assume that wt is a video game. It is not.
The sole purpose of wt is to earn money.
The goal of a f2p game is to earn money from kids with access to credit cards (parents) or game addicted people by offering micro transactions without having a paywall of a full price video game and half price updates/DLCs.
Only with a perfect mix of success and frustration the necessary commitment is possible. Fully intended game flaws are created to enforce players to buy premium stuff - tailored to overcome some of these obstacles.
So offering a fair and balanced game play can’t be a goal of any f2p game as i would simply reduce business opportunities. Just google “how f2p games work” and you might rethink your statement.
Due to steady flow of new players, data analysis and very accurate behaviour predictions based on a large data pool it is obvious what amount of money which kind of player will spend.
Back to topic:
The recent discussion was interesting - from my pov wt has implemented a hell of undisclosed “features” in the MM which are similar to a SBMM. You might see this when your enemies get “smarter” during a game session if you have some wins in a row; other signs are increased full uptier ratios and “less smarter” (to be polite) teammates…
It’s core principle of F2P games. Would be very surprised if this doesn’t happen. Would be nice if there’s way to test it, but alas
Absurd discussion. The system by skill is like the
Communist … nice on paper but nefarious in real life. The reasons have already been stated:
If you improve and every time you get punished playing against better players by logic you will earn less rewards. It is unfair.
For a newbie to play against the same level will only
only makes him settle in ignorance. Playing against superior people makes you learn: sites, strategies …
In addition, the teams are a mix of players, you will have more or less demanding games over time.
The ‘pay to win’ model of business is not usually sustainable in the long term. Over time, the gaming experience tends to consume itself, resulting in a stagnant or decreasing player base. This mainly occurs because an indirect barrier to entry is created by disadvantages those who are not willing to spend money . However, in the case of War Thunder, they may have balanced it enough to minimize its impact. In that scenario, it couldn’t be argued that they are not attempting to provide a fair gaming experience for all…
Yeah…i know that it wouldnt work probably…but then there should be more tutorials that would teach you more things that are in game. Like my mention mini map and how to work with it, how to mark with it. A SPAA tutorial for both low tier, radar, SAM SPAAs how they work, how to aim them…to teach people more.
But then there is the problem of the high tier premiums where a new players just buy them, know nothing about the game how it works, where to aim. Have only 1 vehicle in line up. That just massivly hurt high/top tiers. Maybe if the premiums were level lock then maybe it would help…but then there is still the problem of 1 dead leavers or just people that barely bring even 2 vehicles in line up. But that is a another problem.
Newbie kills experienced player in his meta-vehicle - let´s say KV1B, with a thousand kills under his belt - and gets a massive reward (RP and Leones). Now skilled meta-hero kills newbie who tries to figure out his latest Panzer III, skilled player has now a thousand and one kills on his shiny KV1B but next to none reward. How about?
I played MW2019 and stopped precisely because of SBMM. The matches were becoming increasingly sweaty to the point where it was just ridiculous.
From this time on, I avoid any game with SBMM in place. When a new COD comes out and it has SBMM, its a pass for me.
Having a mix of good and bad players on both teams is important. This is why original Modern Warfare, Insurgency and CS Source gripped me for so long in the past. Dedicated servers for the win. If a bad player thinks he is getting destroyed on the server, he was always free to choose a different one. Nobody forced anyone via matchmaker into a certain playstyle.
I think a matchmaker is a major flaw in War Thunder. I was not joking in my previous reply. It really is quite noticeable some mild form of SBMM is in place in the past few years, especially if you play the game as long as I do (2015).
I think WT should have a server list just like its in custom battles or at least the way sim battles are done. I want full EC. No idea why is Gaijin so hellbent on having a matchmaker.
Mhm - also here i have a different pov.
From a holistic pov f2p players are simply there to play target for p2w players. And it is not a question of “willing to spend money” - gaijin is simply not offering the “right” products for them. So “non-paying” players are never a problem for f2p games, either they can be turned into paying players or they are not worth to deal with them.
The backlash in May this year was simply based on the fact that the p2w scheme has changed to a p2play scheme over the years. So even with premium time and premium vehicles a hell of players simply get stuck in the grind…
Attempting is imho not the right wording - pretending fits much better.
The key elements for fair gameplay are either unknown (like ALL features of the MM) or highly questionable (BR setting policy), so i am not sure how you get to your conclusion.
I mean from a pure quality pov - i never understood why they are able to gain 120+ million € in revenues with such a flawed product. Some of the bugs in game play, game mechanics, vehicle models, damage models etc are there for years; despite being addressed multiple times.
QC of patches got better the last few times, but it looks like that they simply focus only on stuff able to gain income for gaijin - any significant improvements for players (before May 2023) were either not intended or happend by accident.