u czech, mate ?

Btw…dont be hating on XVM stats, doesn´t matter what colour the player gets from the code, even different XVMs use different colors for same stats. Sometimes I´m orange, sometimes I´m red with GR of 25 (654) and WR 51. Btw none of those XVM´s seem to update on regular basis, because I believe my GR is now much higher, also my WR is now 53% and it shows me 0.1k battles in tanks I have 200+ battles with…
What was my point however is, that if you can suppose the XVM is actual (see above) you can roughly say, what can u expect from that player…Though you ´re right that you can only differ total noobs from decent players by comparing their GR (15-20 vs 35+)

The problem with the discussion of skill based matchmaking is one of definition. I don’t think that basically splitting the community by winrate, efficiency or wnX would help anyone in the long run, though it might make games a bit more even. Bad players, who are just relatively new but not ignorant won’t be able to watch better players to learn from them, for example (yes, I believe this happens).

So, what about the definition of skill-based-matchmaking? For me this term just means that the matchmaker takes skill into account when building teams and that it’s a fundamental metric, not an afterthought, for it. I don’t mind playing with high-skill players in the other team or bad players in mine. What I do mind is playing against great players with only bad players on my side. The matchmaker just has to even out the teams, not just in terms of tank power and/or matchmaking weight, but also in terms of player skill. The way to do this can be as simple as adding up the [insert rating system here]-numbers for both teams and requiring them to be roughly equal, same as it is with matchmaking weight of vehicles. Many other variants are of course possible, just ANYTHING to make the teams skills be closer than they often are at the moment.

The whole point is: I don’t (just) play WoT to win, I play to have a good fight. I don’t mind losing a game that is close when the other team just plainly did a better job (though I of course would prefer to win), but losing 3 close games is so much better than steam-rolling the enemy team 3 times for no other reason than them being screwed by the matchmaker (player-skill wise).

I have basically stopped playing for now because of this. I kept track for a few days where I played multiple hours a day, and just over 2/3 of all matches were very one-sided – one way or the other. That is not fun for either team, and quite frankly not worth my time (or money). I’ll play a match every now and again, but that’s about it, and I doubt it’ll change unless there is something fundamentally changed in regards to the team balance.

1. cos the MMker is working flawless and speedlight fast so new conditions won’t add to the waiting time – i don’t want that for sure

2. cos WinRatio was not enaugh so we got efficiency rating but cos of cap mania it was not good – then we got
WN1 to 6 and was not good either …then WN7 now WN8 , and in the mean time PR and others….so we make skill MM based on WHAT?????? – till we get a formula that will be good for all regardless of tier and tank type …big NO

3. cos tomatoes are everywhere so if they implement it in the most reasonable way with similar skilled teams (2 unicum + 7 average + 6 tomatoes for each team with every tier having same weight in skill) – those tomatoes are still there…and they will “ruin” the game and fun anyway
and if we have games of 15unicum vs 15 unicum then….some unicum will have to be the new tomatoes…..and for games wuth 15 tomatoes vs 15 tomatoes….they will kill each other and wont have an ideea of what the do wrong…and will complain that they are good and need to go to upper levels….but based on what ?…they are good at theyr level…how do you promote them?…and what you do once they promote and then are bashed…if you relegate them…will have new whinnings……wtf…you solve a problem generating others

4. there always been a problem…type59 flood, kv1 he, bad moderators, rigged games, OP1S,nerf arty, nerf td, nerf anything, fv(183), he shells affair, russian bias, etc etc etc people love to complain and to find problems where there is no case…….let’s play the game…..for those that need to play against same level players…just go to clan wars and teambattles…..skill MM is IMPLEMENTED THERE ALREADY…so WTF is this DISCUSSION ABOUT?

5. i had games with lots of greens and purples and blues in my team vs whites and yellow and reds….95% to win….result….3-15 in 3 minutes
i had games with the opposite team colors…….15-0…….
so what do people believe that skilled MM will solve?

6. every system of calculating skill will have it’s padders….and they will be promoted by this……they are bad at all levels..i see nowhere and noone liking them …except themself

7. an old player that played bad at the begininning..will have to stay at low levels even if he is much better now…..and if you take into account only last lets say 30 days….then if you take a break you are relegated …and if you take into account last 1000 games…..but you played last year…you still have to accomodate….so again NO NO NO….

yes i know i am trolling with this post….but…get serious……it is not a real problem…..till now i see more problem arising from it than problems solved…so i say BIG NO…random battles have theyr name for a reason….THEY ARE RANDOM…..go to a dictionary and read the deffinition of RANDOM

and last word to those unicums that get bored…..if you are bored it means you spent too much time in the game and neglected other activities……dudes…even SerB wrote at one point that this is WRONG

alex

Then there was the question does not even ask what SS actually wanted it to ask. He wanted to know do we want skill based mm or not. Not whether we want skill based mm based on principle that can never work. The poll was as badly laid out as this:
Do you like meat?
a) yes I like chicken
b) yes I like fish
c) no I hate all meat
So according to your own poll only two kinds of meat exist. We know that is not true.

The rest of the post clearly shows to me that SS is hard against skill based mm but doesn’t know anything about what kind of _different_ (yes, there are different versions of skill based mm!) skill based systems can be created or how skill based mm is done in other games. The poll asked the wrong questions and as such the answers are meaningless. I voted for not skill based mm in the poll because I don’t want skill based mm based on win ratio or wg fail rating. But I want skill based mm in wot based on elo! It is a proven concept, it works very well in many many games and no game has done skill based mm based on win ratio or wg rating…

I tried sending SS messages so he could correct his poll but he either missed my posts, didn’t read them or ignored them. I hope next time you put a poll on your website you SS at least spend 2 minutes trying to understand what is the question, what do yo want to know? Next time you want to know about skill based mm and do people want it here is a poll you can use:

Do you want skill based mm?
a) no
b) yes

As for your article it is full of all kinds of mistakes and common misunderstandings about skill based mm. Noobs fighting each others, skill not being verifiable at all or statpadding.

Disappointing.

That is simply not true. Now we are not playing in balanced teams in long run (with exception of average player), because we has also our skill level which influence outcome. Imagine a unicum A. What is average number of unicums if we count his teams from 10000 battles? More than 1, because A IS a unicum.What about enemies? It is less (if unicums are 0,1% of population). Subsequently there would be less tomatoes/greens/blues in ‘A’ teams.

Same with tomatoes and so on. And this is the reason that better players win more in long run.

After introduction dUG system in battles in long run Unicum A will be always by balanced out by unicum B in enemy team. It is huge change and I would like to see some argument that it doesn’t influence win ratio