Was the MM system always unbalanced ?

[Frylock 1,617]

Apparently,  this Idea got Invalid 

This is what spy said "That's how MM works, when player count is low, MM expands rank brackets to fill battles faster. The good news is the situation should improve when the experiment is over."- To me this is not true, there are many cases prior to the experiment where you get low ranks lower than a general going against legends. 2. there are currently more mobile players than pc players so how can the amount be low. 3. the Tanki Online count is not accurate the ones you see online are actually players that are on pc it doesn't count players that are on mobile. I really want to hear your input on this. thank you for your time :D.

Edited December 17, 2020 by MysticBlood

[Maf 32,300]

"The situation should improve" doesn't mean "the problem will be completely fixed". Such scenarios will continue to happen, especially during non-peak times when few players are online. Spy correctly said that this is how Matchmaking is supposed to work, so there are no issues to "fix" per se. However, it would make sense that once the experiment is over and battles are back to 8v8, battles with large rank brackets will be less common because it's much faster to find 16 players to fill a game as opposed to 32.

So regarding your poll, no — MM was not always unbalanced before the experiment, but it wasn't always balanced either.

[Tokamak 1,021]

It is how MM works, mix different rank level in each team. Has stars are now mostly given via daily mission it doesn't really matter to not be able of the top 3, unless top 3 missions and strong ego (with poor skill).

Edited December 7, 2020 by Tokamak

[Frylock 1,617]

@Maf Well I was on My low acc prior to the experiment it was not fair. I was Wo5 going against brigadiers  . MM is not balanced it needs a rework there could be others that had this experience too. and it pretty much happened commonly. just saying :/ and in group mode its worse you going against even slightly higher ranks.

Edited December 6, 2020 by MysticBlood

[OctobersVeryOwn 2]

Yeah MM is unfair. Ive played against players with 9k gs (very high ranks) with my major acc. This is unacceptable matchmaking.

[FrozenRailgun 1,771]

1 hour ago, OctobersVeryOwn said:

Yeah MM is unfair. Ive played against players with 9k gs (very high ranks) with my major acc. This is unacceptable matchmaking.

Well I myself have over 9k+ GS however, I do not seek to crush other tankers. But yes, matchmaking still need some rework.

Edited December 7, 2020 by FrozenRailgun

[E_polypterus 2,374]

Nah, that's coz MM sucks : P 

[wolverine848 13,097]

6 hours ago, Tokamak said:

It is how MM works, mix diferent rank level in each team. Has stars are now mostly given via daily mission it dies not really matter to nog be oate of the top 3, unless top 3 missions snd strong ego.

Mixing ranks (with wide rank-ranges) is bad for the lower rankers, regardless of whether or not teams are balanced.

The low ranks spend a disproportionate amount of time re-spawning. They have a harder time completing many of their missions - kills, score points, collect crystals.  They are at a disadvantage for all of these in addition to the Top-3 missions.

[Tanker-Arthur 2,971]

Yeah, even before the experiment, my mini account (which is Captain and has Mk4 9/10 equipment) would keep being put in matches where the majority of players were between Brigadier and Marshal.

The two best ways to solve it are to make matchmaking based on equipment level, with rank as a secondary factor...

Or to make the rank brackets much smaller (of course, this will mean longer wait times in matchmaking).

Edited December 7, 2020 by Tanker-Arthur

[Tokamak 1,021]

Equipment  is  already limited by the narrowed Mark System (4 ranks per Mark). If players do not MU it or buy the adequate Mark available at their rank, there is no point to have ranking. 

It is a competitive game, get use to find some player stronger than you and some weaker than you. 

Don't we love it more when we beat stronger oponent?

[SkillShotX 0]

 

@MysticBlood i agree with what you wrote. As a wo5 rank i can say that the mm system is unbalanced before the experiment becavse ive been placed matches where there were colonels and brigadiers and this  happened oftenly. because of the poor match making system i cant complete my top 3 missions and more. And until the match making system is fixed im leaving this game. I cant take it anymore with this stupid mm system.

Edited December 7, 2020 by SkillShotX

[Picassoo 191]

And it is rather funny because the when it was first introduced the V-LOG told players not to be prejudiced towards it because it was supposed to 'learn' over time

[Blutaar 1,904]

10 hours ago, OctobersVeryOwn said:

Yeah MM is unfair. Ive played against players with 9k gs (very high ranks) with my major acc. This is unacceptable matchmaking.

Looking on a daily basis, how often do you encounter heavily overleveled players?

In a MM-battle, there are always players with a GS that is deviating from the average gear score, either too low or too high - that is how MM works. I sometimes get to join a team in which a player with 5K is present, this is also a balancing-issue, but it is an extreme scenario and does not occur that frequently. 

[SONIC-BOOM 326]

MM has and always will be unbalanced.

Anyone who says any different is either deluded are a buyer, in which case it's win win for them.

It's unbalanced because of the P2W system and also because the MM itself does not work, it never has, and the devs like it just the way it is, unbalanced means more cash. 

[SONIC-BOOM 326]

3 hours ago, Picassoo said:

And it is rather funny because the when it was first introduced the V-LOG told players not to be prejudiced towards it because it was supposed to 'learn' over time

Utter twoddle....learn over time  yeah right ok.

[cosmic666 1,055]

12 hours ago, Maf said:

"The situation should improve" doesn't mean "the problem will be completely fixed". Such scenarios will continue to happen, especially during non-peak times when few players are online. Spy correctly said that this is how Matchmaking is supposed to work, so there are no issues to "fix" per se. However, it would make sense that once the experiment is over and battles are back to 8v8, battles with large rank brackets will be less common because it's much faster to find 16 players to fill a game as opposed to 32.

So regarding your poll, no — MM was not always unbalanced before the experiment, but it wasn't always balanced either.

Do me a favour @Maf put out a post saying elephants can fly and can also play the bagpipes blindfolded, i want to see who agrees with you. 

[Tokamak 1,021]

51 minutes ago, cosmic666 said:

Do me a favour @Maf put out a post saying elephants can fly and can also play the bagpipes blindfolded, i want to see who agrees with you. 

You can already see in his post who agrees with him. No need to post irrelevant post.

Let me ask Dumbo if he can also play Bagpipes blindfolded...

Edited December 7, 2020 by Tokamak

[DRAKO523 795]

In my experience, it was never exactly balanced nor unbalanced. I feel like Matchmaking system would of been better off if the player base was larger, non-peak hours play a huge part in MM as well (from personal experience). This is the same experience I get from most MMO games with a "matchmaker" the idea and intentions are good, however things cannot always be perfect in such a system, it depends on a lot of factors and a very common occurrence is the player base size.

I do have hope that all these "experiments" are worth it and that the feedback they get as well as their own data is put to good use for both the players and developers, perhaps it won't make everything 100% perfect, but it should; at the very least improve the situation in Matchmaking.

[Maf 32,300]

2 hours ago, cosmic666 said:

Do me a favour @Maf put out a post saying elephants can fly and can also play the bagpipes blindfolded, i want to see who agrees with you. 

[Tanker-Arthur 2,971]

Oh, just realized, you can make a Brigadier-Generalissimo's life so much better if matchmaking put all Legend players into their own pool. Separate Legends and if your rank is lower than Legend, you will never face a Legend except in Pro Battles.  

Why? Because currently, all Legends count as one rank. Really nice to see a Generalissimo player go against players who are Legend 50 and such. It's like fighting someone who's 50 ranks higher than you.

[wolverine848 13,097]

9 hours ago, Tokamak said:

It is a competitive game, get use to find some player stronger than you and some weaker than you.

There's a difference between beating someone who...

1) Is similar rank but upgraded through $ to max out for that rank   or...

2) is a 2-4 ranks ahead and thus might have unlocked better items

vs

3) Players who are 8 ranks higher and have 1) higher unlocked items and 2) more crystals and 3) more time to have upgraded the better items.

You don't see the difference between 1)/2) and 3) ?

[wolverine848 13,097]

6 hours ago, BloodPressure said:

Looking on a daily basis, how often do you encounter heavily overleveled players?

In a MM-battle, there are always players with a GS that is deviating from the average gear score, either too low or too high - that is how MM works. I sometimes get to join a team in which a player with 5K is present, this is also a balancing-issue, but it is an extreme scenario and does not occur that frequently. 

That's different than being one of 4 or 5 players well below Legend rank, but being placed in a mostly Legend battle by MatchMaker.

And before you say it will create longer waiting times if changed - so what.  Guess what many of these players do anyway - EXIT that battle and try again for a more reasonable battle.

MM does no one favours with unbalanced matches.  The player leaves and has to wait for a new battle and the team loses a player and has to wait for a new player that is generating OD from scratch.  It's Lose- Lose.

[SporkZilla 1,775]

9 hours ago, Tokamak said:

It is a competitive game, get use to find some player stronger than you and some weaker than you. 

Don't we love it more when we beat stronger opponent?

I don't mind fighting stronger players and I wouldn't want every battle to be full of players with the same GS as me, but there are limits

I can compete against some 8000 GS players, and beating them is rewarding, but not Legends or not-Legends with Mk8 equipment and 50% protections and powerful augments

I'd support narrower rank brackets (and rank brackets for Legends so that just-ranked-up Legends don't face Legends with multiples of their XP) instead of MM by GS because I don't think F2Ps or low-spend buyers who have prioritized one hull / one turret / three modules etc. should lose their advantage

Edited December 7, 2020 by SporkZilla

[Tokamak 1,021]

16 minutes ago, SporkZilla said:

I don't mind fighting stronger players and I wouldn't want every battle to be full of players with the same GS as me, but there are limits

I can compete against some 8000 GS players, and beating them is rewarding, but not Legends or not-Legends with Mk8 equipment and 50% protections and powerful augments

I'd support narrower rank brackets (and rank brackets for Legends so that just-ranked-up Legends don't face Legends with multiples of their XP) instead of MM by GS because I don't think F2Ps or low-spend buyers who have prioritized one hull / one turret / three modules etc. should lose their advantage

You comment is faire, on this last ranking the power gap is the biggest and will stay like this for a while. Nevertheless as soon as the Mk7 are available for buyers at lieutenant colonel, it gets complicated, and then as you go up even the F2P become stronger, but in the end they managed it so can you.

[TinBoxGunner 140]

In low rank battles I have been queuing for ctf most of the time but was put to different battle like Siege for example. That if any tells us that player base starts to be too thin. Devs should remove the least popular battle modes for good.