Matchmaking fixes, changes to PRO-battles

[ByeByeBye 1,747]

They won't get rid of the atrocity called MatchMaking...we are stuck with this inferior system, but maybe Tanki will try to address some of it's glaring problems.

 

The problem of mass exoduses from the losing side and too much time waiting in queue just to be put into the last few minutes of a battle could be greatly reduced if the rank brackets were tighter. Who wants to fight someone six, seven, or eight ranks above them? Reduce the rank brackets, give priority to equivalent ranks in queue, and the amount of quitters will lessen.

Yeah, I'm quoting myself, but I'd like to add. 

 

I've thought about this for another couple of days and I really think this is the best possible band-aid on the MM problem. Reduce the rank brackets...this just can't be that hard to do in the coding.  Give priority to equivalent ranks that are in the queue...in other words, if there is a battle with mostly rank 20s, give priority to the rank 20s waiting in queue...not the guy that was in queue first. 

 

Keep rank brackets tighter and you get more balanced battles.  If someone wants to dominate, let them buy equipment and micro-upgrades.  It is not fair to put players that are eight ranks above another player in the same battle...the M4 vs M2 situation is just terrible.  If players get into more balanced battles by rank, they will tend to stay even on the losing side because there will be more of a chance for a come back or at least there won't be as much unmitigated slaughter by players that have had almost twice as much time to buy and upgrade equipment...M4 vs M2.

[r_Issimo2 1,495]

The Group option is part of the matchmaking system so three friends can play together. Remember it is a team work, so if every players in a team (randoms players and group) would always be more successful if they work together either your play in matchmaking or pro-battle.

Regarding added feature, you can customise your battle with the pro-battle system that suit your liking and keep you in your comfort zone: no more Drone, overdrive or other feature.

If you want to learn more about pro-battle and battle customisation check out this useful wiki article: PRO_Battles 

Is this a copy and paste generic answer or what?

[Viking4s 10,791]

But then not everybody has a Pro-pass or wants to buy one as Pro-battles don't contribute to daily missions.

PRO-battles are awesome as you can parkour, just hangout with friends or play special battles 1v1,... options are endless.

You should try them sometimes, it is definitely worth buying the one month pro-pass or find an in-game clan (but you won't be able to create battles).

 

The pro-pass cost some crystals: 4100 crystals for your rank. However if you do your daily missions, the crystals rewards from one week chain, like the 4240 crystals from week 6, can easily cover for one month pro-pass cost.

 

Do one mission per day in MM, and then when finished, you play in PRO-battles the remaining time of your day. PRO-Battles still provide XP and crystals. 

In the end, it is about how you managed your crystals and how you decide to play with what the game offers.

[cyborg11b 95]

PRO-battles are awesome as you can parkour, just hangout with friends or play special battles 1v1,... options are endless.

You should try them sometimes, it is definitely worth buying the one month pro-pass or find an in-game clan (but you won't be able to create battles).

 

The pro-pass cost some crystals: 4100 crystals for your rank. However if you do your daily missions, the crystals rewards from one week chain, like the 4240 crystals from week 6, can easily cover for one month pro-pass cost.

 

Do one mission per day in MM, and then when finished, you play in PRO-battles the remaining time of your day. PRO-Battles still provide XP and crystals. 

In the end, it is about how you managed your crystals and how you decide to play with what the game offers.

Something to consider, thx.

[aizatt 32]

At first I think this update will make me hhapier to play thi game...but the naming map are conquered by the russian , freeze are the same and firebird not really changed...can someone show me whats the damage different after this update between freeze and firebird more specifically.

[Destrod 2,634]

At first I think this update will make me hhapier to play thi game...but the naming map are conquered by the russian , freeze are the same and firebird not really changed...can someone show me whats the damage different after this update between freeze and firebird more specifically.

The exact modifications in Freeze and Firebird's damage output and other statistics can be found here.

[OKDad70 862]

Yeah, I'm quoting myself, but I'd like to add. 

 

I've thought about this for another couple of days and I really think this is the best possible band-aid on the MM problem. Reduce the rank brackets...this just can't be that hard to do in the coding.  Give priority to equivalent ranks that are in the queue...in other words, if there is a battle with mostly rank 20s, give priority to the rank 20s waiting in queue...not the guy that was in queue first. 

 

Keep rank brackets tighter and you get more balanced battles.  If someone wants to dominate, let them buy equipment and micro-upgrades.  It is not fair to put players that are eight ranks above another player in the same battle...the M4 vs M2 situation is just terrible.  If players get into more balanced battles by rank, they will tend to stay even on the losing side because there will be more of a chance for a come back or at least there won't be as much unmitigated slaughter by players that have had almost twice as much time to buy and upgrade equipment...M4 vs M2.

They stopped the kits allowing over-rank for a while. Now, again, kits can give you higher M than your rank. Ricosck (Marshal) was in a DM with ranks from Brigadier to Legend. One of the Generals had a full M4 Thunder-Viking. Kinda surprised me. A General with equipment I'd expect of a Legend. Sure, it didn't matter in that match, but it matters to your proposal. 

 

The MM system needs to account rank, experience, equipment, M-level and microupgrades, recent performance of the player, whether the player often leaves early, and several other factors that will matter to team balance.

 

One simply cannot compensate for team members communicating verbally. As has been recently mentioned, friends can group up to four. That is good. I sure enjoy it when I can do it (which is quite seldom). Four friends, verbally communicating in the battle, sharing turret information, target information, tactical information, coordinating runs, it isn't easy, but it is a significant advantage for that team. If two groups of four were trying to coordinate, it seems likely they'd end up in the same battle often, on the same side, often enough to matter. The system cannot account for that. A team of 8 separated individuals counting on in-battle chat simply cannot compete with a team of 8 verbally communicating live.

 

In other words, it is hard. I think the strategy for now has to be shorter battles when they get lopsided and players on the losing side start leaving.

 

Incentives for not leaving would help. Losing is a good teacher (assuming you care about winning).

 

I like the saying, sometimes you win, sometimes you learn. Right now, there is little incentive to learn.

 

Sure, leaving the battle early forfeits the crystal reward, but rewards on the losing side of a lopsided battle aren't much above zero. It might help if battles required a deposit, of, say, 200 crystals, forfeited for leaving the battle early, but fully refunded at the end of the battle. The forfeited deposits could be split with those who finished on the losing team. (Not overall, but just the losing side, incentivizing them to stay.) I can imagine problems with implementation, still.

[OKDad70 862]

MM stuck me with my M4 Titan-Twins into blue in an assault battle. It started fine, but then red started coming. I can't guess why red had such dominance. We were all Legends. Blue being spawnkilled in assault, with all Legends, presumably all M3+ equipment. The battle lasted 5.5 minutes only because five to eight of the red team were in the blue base spawnkilling.

 

MM just doesn't work. A losing team has no hope in 90% of cases. Knowing that makes some players bail early, making a comeback impossible.

 

MM is broke. I don't play pro-battles. Please fix the match making system. Please add early-end if players start leaving the battle. 

[OKDad70 862]

Screen capture here:

https://ufile.io/bm4s8

 

I tried the image input, but it didn't load.

 

Anyway, playing as Riconot, Freeze M2.6, Hornet M2.6, in a Red Alert TDM with same ranks, I ended up with 32 kills and the highest score, but my team lost 100 to 69.

 

It was interesting that the winning team had a shaft with almost the same score and the same 32 kills. Thus, legenda_ander had 32% of his team's kills, and I had nearly half of ours. The players all would appear to have been involved for the full battle. (That is good. It also means it was not a factor causing the imbalance in this match.)

 

Here is my dilemma: Despite the difference between a mid-shaft and a light-freeze, we lead our respective teams admirably. However, his team was pretty good. My team was not. Why? How did MM set legenda_ander and Riconot as such equally matched opponents, while so mismatching the rest of the team?

 

Think if I'd been on legenda_andre's team. The battle would have been 100 to 20 and completed before the seven minute mark, maybe worse. If legenda_ander had been on my team, no telling. It might have been close, it might have been a comparable slaughter. My point is the overall team has to well match the opponent team. If that is impossible, MM should be abandoned as it is.

 

Referencing the game of about two years ago, I remember frustrating battles where one team had no hope. Many of those were obvious raids by voice-communicating clans. Regardless, I didn't experience so much frustration back then. Frustration is mostly normal now. Fun, competitive battles that came down to the last second are rare now. Not so under the old system.

 

And the rewards! The last place player received zero crystals. Zero. Why would he stay in the battle? Heck, with zero score and 20 deaths, I wonder that he wasn't actively making himself a target, never firing a shot. Still, 1st of winner got 868 crystals; I, 1st of loser, got 354. With that much discrepancy for equal performances between winning and losing, I wonder at much of the mechanics of this game. Crystal rewards drop fast from first place. No wonder players leave as soon as things look hopeless.

 

MM is broke. The rewards system is not helping.

[wolverine848 13,097]

And another battle where team #s not even.

 

Maybe someone can explain why a team winning 1-0 after 3 minutes suddenly loses 2 tanks and it remains 6 vs 8 for the rest of the battle.

We lost 3-2

 

This makes absolutely NO SENSE

[OKDad70 862]

Just played four rugby battles. All four were spawnkill fests. I happened to be on the winning side once. MM is broke.