Hello everyone,
this is a sort of followup on the corridors post, but it will involve skill MM topic as well, so bear with me, because it’s going to be a bit longer.
The corridor post certainly raised some discussion about good and bad maps and I’ve read some of the feedback in the comments (the one not beginning with OMG U SUX and such anyway) and I still have the feeling that there is a fundamental misunderstanding of the underlying principles, that made World of Tanks successful in the first place. I also have the feeling that a LOT of (even otherwise very skilled) players fail to see the “big picture” so to say – a feeling, that is shared by the developers according to the developer discussion on the matter (the earlier “skill MM” post).
There are some extremely basic principles, that noone really usually bothers to take into consideration when talking about such fundamental changes as “skill MM” or overall map design. One of them is what I call “sometimes up, sometimes down“. When you say it like that, most people imagine something along the lines of “sometimes you get lucky (team, map), sometimes you don’t” – and that is certainly true, but this principle is one of the fundamental “fun-makers” of the game as well and is there intentionally. Let’s have a look at it – and again, just try to be open minded and imagine this all (if you can) from a perspective of an average player, not someone who takes World of Tanks “really seriously”.
When are you having fun? Is it because you win? Well, yes, certainly, but that is only a part of that. It’s when odds are stacked in your favour that a lot (most) players actually have fun. The most elemental expression of this principle is the way matchmaker spread works. Sometimes, you end up at the bottom of the team and you hate it, but sometimes, you end up on top and you just pwn. But this goes further than that, like that awesome moment when you get to your favourite position with a vehicle, that has a certain advantage on that particular map (we’ll get to that) and you know this is just great, because first enemies are starting to appear right before the barrel of your gun. In that particular game, you have the advantage.
What I am trying to say: this game has a set of maps and a set of vehicle classes. Some maps intentionally (!) are advantageous to certain classes, some maps to other classes. Heavies aren’t that awesome on Steppes, light tanks aren’t that awesome on Mountain Pass. This is intentional – it’s a part of the odds stacking basic principle and this is also the reason why I personally don’t mind having some maps not as “class friendly” to some classes as the other ones. Sure, you might be pissed you end up on Mountain Pass with a light tank, but in the next battle, you’ll end up on Steppes. Yes, you’ll remember the bad experience more, since that’s how human mind works, but on average, it’s balanced (not considering the “bad streaks” of bad maps, but that is another matter). Please note that this does NOT mean that there aren’t maps, that are simply BAD. The question of course is, how subjective is that. Some people hate Malinovka, I love it (it’s probably my favourite map). Some people love Ruinberg, I don’t like it – not sure why, it just doesn’t sit with me. Does that mean Ruinberg is a bad map? No. Just doesn’t suit my playstyle I guess.
In any case, the corridors are simply a method of making the map more inexperienced user friendly, as I explained in the previous post. The fact that some map has corridors however does NOT mean lighter classes (LT, MT) are completely useless on that map. One of the often mentioned maps, that is allegedly “bad”, is the North-West. And yet, only yesterday, I was in a battle where the opposing team had a T37 with a player from Odem Mortis. That guy absolutely dominated (it was really great gameplay, IIRC 6 kills and top damage of his team) and it was only because the rest of his team folded that we brought him down in the end. It’s completely possible to play well on such a map – IF you are good enough. Currently, I do not believe there is any map in the game where any class of vehicles would be absolutely useless (and again, keep in mind, I am talking in absolutes now, sure – arty on Himmelsdorf sucks for example, but it doesn’t suck as to not being able to do a single point of damage).
By the way, about this “sometimes up, sometimes down” principle… that’s not just a figment of my imagination, the fact it works like that was confirmed numerous times by developers.
So, how does this tie in with the skill MM?
Well, simple. Just like the maps, the quality of the team is an odds stacking element as well. Skill MM (ladder system) would completely negate that – I am sure I don’t have to explain, see the “developer post” for the arguments.
One aspect of “skill MM” would however also be the “both teams of equal skill” version – not a ladder, just having both teams have same amount of equally skilled players. Personally, I think this is just as bad as the “ladder/league” system – here’s why: imagine being a single unicum in the battle. Now, the first thing you know is that the other team has exactly one unicum as well (let’s go with the 1:1 skill MM model for the sake of conversation). This itself alters the gameplay – in vanilla World of Tanks, there is no way of viewing player skill rating within the battle, so if you don’t have XVM or something (and noone on your team does as well) while the other team does have it, they will know you are the unicum while you don’t know who the most dangerous opponent is. So, you can guess who will be the primary target of their team – that’s right, yours truly. It already works like that (“kill their KV-85 he’s the only skilled player they have” – just today), skill MM would only reinforce this.
But let’s get back to the “odds stacking” principle. Introducing skill MM would mean that victories with strong players on your side and tomatoes on the other would not happen, simply because both teams would always be roughly equal in skill. And no, that’s not a good thing.
You see, even though few would admit it, people LOVE to roflstomp the enemy team. No matter how much you deny it, it will always be true and people sometimes feel guilty about it (that’s why polls in this are generally pointless or at least “tipped”). And I am not talking about you, who read this. I am not even talking about all the FTR readers. I am talking about ALL the players (except the very, very few, who honestly, genuinely, really want a fair fight every time).
Sure, there are (very few) people who really want every battle to be thrilling, on the edge of the knife. But you have to consider that in such a case, a game (that is essentially relaxing) turns into a competition and that is not what most people want. And yes, again, what I wrote above was confirmed by the developers time and time again. World of Tanks is a game for “daddies”, who come home from work – or, rather, for everyone, not for competitive players only.
Depriving the players of at least some “easy victories” (that come as a part of the game model, I don’t mean completely random ones where for example a key player goes AFK for some reason and the rest folds) will make players lose interest.
Summary
And so, we reach this point again, where the odds stacking returns back to the maps. Imagine if all maps were – let’s say “normalized”. Let’s say – half of the map a city, half of the map open space. Surely, this would satisfy the people, who loudly proclaim how some of the maps are imbalanced. And yet, for the entire playerbase, it would make the gameplay more boring. Naturally, the mediums don’t go through the city, they would flank through the open side, while the city would end in a stalemate (as it often does even now) and the side with better flankers would win. The battles would become certainly more monotonous, which in turn would promote less actual thinking on maps, that are stacked against you (a light tank on the North-West map, like that Odem Mortis guy).
Current El-Halluf, so bashed by everyone else, is in my opinion far from unplayable. Sure, you can be angry about corridors as much as you want – you can be angry even that the game map promotes defensive gameplay (do people really have such a short memory as to not remember how bad El-Halluf was before the center overhaul? THAT was bad), but that is okay, because this map is there for people, who actually PREFER defensive gameplay. That’s a valid choice you know, other – open – maps (such as the Steppes) are in turn there for you, if you prefer fast tanks.
In the end, it’s all about the big picture, which a lot of the commenters seem to be missing. This game HAS to be friendly to lower skilled players, to players who prefer defensive combat, to players, who are kept in the game by the fact that once per blue moon, the game stacks the odds in their favour (map, tech, top of the team) so much they pwn too. Because these are the players that drive the game.
Don’t believe me? Let me give you an example to put the numbers in perspective. I pulled out the stats and yesterday, the article about the corridors was viewed by cca 15 thousand people. If Wargaming banned EVERYONE, who did read that article including me, they would hardly even feel it on their profits, because neither the “skilled players” nor “whales” carry this game economically, the “daddies” do. There is a proof to this statement as well: recently, Wargaming banned several thousand (on RU, ASIA and EU in total, I think the number reaches cca 30 thousand) players and large majority of those players had a premium account, because that’s what most of the advanced bots require to run. Would they do that, if they couldn’t afford such “losses”? Of course not.
I hope that puts the numbers in perspective. Having large amounts of players is the essence of the Free to Play model after all. I tried to explain as best as I could the “big picture” above the decisions Wargaming took.
Important: Again, I would like to emphasize that what was written above does NOT mean that all the maps are fine and don’t need any overhaul. God knows there are some seriously shitty maps in this game (I think we can all agree on Hidden Village) and some parts of existing maps do need tweaks. This post is about the general ideas, not concrete map issues.
again the corridor stuff? there is only one map what need to remove or a complett remake and that is phororovka and the little brother, both is crap
It’s… more of an overall post. As for Prokhorovka, I am sure many would disagree with you on that.
I really like that map. Without arty it is one of the best maps in the game.
With arty it still works if you can grow a pair of balls. With alot of arty (which barely happens) it toally sucks.
Any map without arty is better, including Himmelsdorf mentioned by SilentStalker as bad to artillery.
another anti arty retard.. dude.. it’s part of the game.. you can’t stay in fucking cover.. that’s your fault.. you know how hard is to play arty these days? only idiots die from arty..
only idiots stay in cover/unspotted all the game
artillery breaks the game, no matter how hard it is to play
Arty encourages camping as you just said.
Staying in hard cover= Camping
SS: As always, very interesting articles. Was expecting to read interesting comments as well but: comments #1, 2, 3 and 4= appropriates. Then there we go with the “retards” and “idiots” which provoke an uncontrollable gesture of my hand that goes in the upper right corner of the screens and click the X button. It is so sad, very sad…
Agrred, in my US heavies (T29/32/34) I just go hulldown near rails and can shoot almost 2/3 of map, without having to worry about being anihilited. With arty, well it still can work, but needs more skill and luck. Had a game in T34 iirc where all scumbags (there were 3) aimed only at me – after firing 2 or 3 shots I was down to 1 % HP “cause you were the only one spotted”.
When it goes to principles, that’s my biggest concern – gameplay promotes camping. I go forward to scout/shoot enemies and get “punished” by being “the only one spotted”, which causes early back to garage after being executed in 1 or 2 min. by enemy TDs/arty.
Or situation from yesterday – I got pulverized by VK 3002M while playing M46 Patton. he put shot after shot into me while being unspotted… As we all know, M46 has one of best v-range in game so after 2nd or even 3rd shot I surely should be able to spot that VK, but nope, game said no way.
“so after 2nd or even 3rd shot I surely should be able to spot that VK”
Enough bushes => Not necessarily.
You do realize there were ambushes (even written down) where one side didn’t realize where the attack came from until too late, right? ^^
M46 is a great spotter!! if you know how to play and what skills to raise on that tank. and if v3002 can spot you and you can’t spot him.. sorry mate.. but you’re a bad player with poor skills set on your tank.
Or the VK was using someone else’s spots. I do this all the time on Prok. when I’m playing TDs. I let others spot, and stay outside of detection range.
Nope, Prokhorovka/Fiery salient is easily the worst map ingame, they need to remove 1 of them and rework the other heavily.
Aside from those 2 we still have Campinovka, Westfield, Swamp and Komarin.
I love Prokhorovka, that map is great. But it depends a lot on your team. If they all decide to camp by the road… bad! If they all rush onto the hill without cover from the flank… bad! Otherwise, great map!
I, for one, hate the Hidden Valley map, while I don’t feel it worked well before, after the overhaul, I find it even more retarded. In my experience, the northern team rarely wins the battle unless they have a buttload of defensive tanks that go up the hill and dig in so they don’t get outflanked on two sides.
Ofcourse, your experience may vary.
Westfield? It’s not that bad, they should only remove those empty fields on both sides (put there bushes/trees/fences/hills), cause once u got spotted there there’s no where to run nor hide.
I love Prokhorovka/FS, though I do wish that WG would simply remove the old one and make FS the “new” Prok, as I see no need for 2 versions of the same map, at least in this case. And I think that it’s FAAAAAAAAAR from the worst map. Could it use some tweaks here and there? Sure. But I love it because it’s an open, country map with long sight lines.
As for the rest, I don’t mind any of them, except for Campinovka, and that one could be fixed just by moving the standard map spawns over to where arty currently spawns. Part of me wishes that all tanks on Westfield would spawn at cap, so the battles were less predictable, though that’d be very tough on really slow tanks. And Swamp needs to be tweaked so that the east spawn didn’t see going south as suicidal (and vice-versa for west spawning tanks).
Prokhorovka/FS is one of the BEST maps in game at the moment.. you need skill to stay hidden to use your tank. require understanding of game mechanincs on camo and spotting. MOST player have no fucking ideea on how to use SKILLS like: camo, Situation awareness, Recon, combined wih camo net+binoculars for td and with Coated Optics for scouts. THERE are skills that work in combos and people whine about ..”invisible tanks”. READ THE FUCKING MANUAL people. they fucked hellcat because of you. they fucked spotting time because of you, it’s no longer 2 to 10 sec spotted, now it’s 5 to 10. Learn to play the fucking game then whine about it like little bitches
LOL? Those maps are one of the bests (beside komarin) – each one of them offers enough range and open field to actually make view range / camo system an option to use.
Prokhorovka would easily be considered as one of the worst maps in the game by many. Try tell a Maus unicum driver that the map is fair to all classes, problem with the map is that many tanks are useless every where on that map while even arty on himms can make destruction on the hill.
I don’t like having double the chance to play Prokhorovka, but I much prefer Fiery salient to the original. The decorative tank hulls in Fiery salient provide some protective cover in the field. Overall I think the new one looks better, and I’d like them to pull the old one.
I’d also like to point out some of your are missing the point “Some maps intentionally (!) are advantageous to certain classes, some maps to other classes.” which would mean some tanks are at a disadvantage on some maps.
It’s important to point out class isn’t the only thing that matters. Some of the more unique vehicles might suffer on certain maps, such at the extremely slow tanks. Sometimes it’s the vehicle traits that limit which maps a vehicle “likes”. An American medium will tend to enjoy working hilly maps more than say a Chinese medium because the difference in gun depression. Yes, you can work around some traits, but you have to be skilled enough/have enough understanding to work around a tanks limiting traits.
I’m not really against the principle of corridors. But i generaly think they are too few options where to run in last maps. I love himmelsdorf for example but it’s a corridor map. Yes but himmelsdorf has 5 corridors spots for me to play. The railways, the west street, the middle, the west death banana alley, and the castel. I’m never stuck somwhere even if i play light tanks and even if this map isn’t suited for them. On the contrary i really dislike mountain pass because it’s not like a himmelsdorf where you feel “okay, heavys are more powerfull here” but more “omg wherever i go i will get rape”. Except the tiny bush on the east side before the swimming pool. (which is a bit unfair because the other side don’t have any like this one.)
My point is i don’t mind that some classes have an advantage on maps. But i don’t want this advantage to be this powerfull that the guy just press his R key, right click spotted tanks and laying death around without even put 2 neurons online.
What a pity that some heavy tanks have a hard time on Prokhorovka. What about putting glass cannon TD’s or scouts on Himmelsdorf or Ensk? Or arty on Ensk?
There are a number of maps where certain tank types are at a disadvantage. Why should heavy tanks get a pass on this?
what tanks are useless on that map dude? have you EVER heard of SPOTTING RANGE? stay out of it and you MAUS will be fine
Maus unicum driver? No such thing.
few disagreements:
even with skill balancing here will be battles you roflstomp and battles you are roflstomped, because of randomness of the game.
However, there will be no series of your team being roflstomped followed by a game you spend chasing enemies who die after you shoot them once and before you reload so you end up with double game of 1200 exp.
You may claim that most people like to roflstomp – but I disagree. Battle where your behavior is meaningless, where no matter how you play your team will win are no fun too.
It doesnt have to be thrilling, but victory is not sweet without a feeling I was needed for it.
And for everyone having mediocre fun from roflstomping opponents, you have other guy frustrated with his team being full of idiots.
You dont have to make 1 vs 1 matching – tank matchmaker doesnt do that also. Just keep some overall level similar – if they have 2 unicums, they will also have a lot of tomatos while we will have average players and such.
Completely another thing is “sometimes up, sometimes down” when we consider classes of the tank.
With heavy tank, no matter the map, I can influence the battle.
Same with medium and td. With artillery it varies.
With light tanks it is not sometime down, sometimes up, it’s rarely up, often down.
My best game in WZ-132 so far was on a northwest 7 frags, over 4k damage, 2 guys left on less then 20 hp and killed by teammates – but only because I used this tank like a medium and I was really, really lucky, with my team playing exactly as aggressive as I needed, not too much (I had time to score those frags) not too little (opponents were preoccupied with my teammates).
But it would never happen if the battle was a roflstomp battle.
Sometimes in every tank on every map you have battle where everyone goes as it should – it doesnt mean that light tanks as a class are ok.
Nortwest is not even the worst map – it’s not severogorsk where you have 3 corridors where everyone fights head on, on northwest you have some room to maneuver, you can run away around the rock and attack your opponent from behind, corridors are connected creating kind of maze and maze offers some opportunities that straight corridors do not.
Light tanks are too much dependend on what both teams will do.
You may claim steppes are bad tanks for heavies (bullshit, since arty nerf heavies are great on steppes), you may try to strain your imagination to look for other such maps, but for lights you will have trouble finding great maps.
Malinovka (before rework, now a bit less), murovanka before rework (now I havent played), westfield, prokhorovka and….. and that’s it?
On other maps fast mediums will do all that scouts can – but better.
Light tanks, with their matchmaking, are generally screwed on most maps.
Let me state this for A FACT. Making maps with corridors will fuck the game for lights tanks, medium tanks and ALL medium to weak armored vehicles. IF you want to play a game with only heavies by all means do.. but don’t fuck the game for the rest of us. IT’S A WELL KNOWN FACT nubs play TD then HEAVIES, then MEDIUMS and then LIGHT tanks. make the game more appealing to nubs it’s ruinning the game for the rest.
you forgot about nubs in the artillery… then td, then the rest…
well said
Sooooo, corridors are for the newbies, but maps that are bad for certain tank classes are fine because if youre not a newbie you can do well? So, are we pro-newbies here or pro-goodie here? You seem to be having a lovely double standard here, and its not a good look.
In any event, nobody much has a problem with the fact that some maps are better than others for certain classes of tank. What we have a problem with is that all the map changes lately have been to make it harder for 2 specific classes of tank (scouts and TDs), and NONE have made it easier. Its fine when some maps suck for scouts and TDs. It is NOT @&@%^$ fine when ALL maps suck for scouts and TDs, and thats the strong current trend. And again, dont tell me that if youre good you can do well on a map in a disadvantaged tank, when your whole reasoning is that its good for newbs.
Thats not only two-faced but also stupid- newbs drive scouts and TDs too you know. Are they supposed to just not play those classes of tank? Or if they do anyway, you think its bad if they go get confused by the terrain in the villages, exactly how much fun do you think they’ll have sitting in the open, or clustering with everyone else and killed first because theyre crunchy?
Do not talk to me about what made WoT great- WoT became great WITH the maps with less corridors,and WITH more bushes and so on. You may NOT conveniently ignore that fact with contrived and dishonest rationalisations.
What the real problem is: Corridor map with no arty cover, so you either 1. Brawl there and get artied 2. Tries to snipe from the back corridor, spotted, get artied 3. Go somewhere irreverent, didn’t carry the game, and still get artied anyway!
Recently I’ve been driving a lot in lights and meds and I love the new El Hallouf. The reworked “hill” part is great for all tanks, since there are several angles of approach and if the enemy is distracted, you can flank around and do some cheap damage. I’ve earned my ace tanker badge on RU251 on the first day of the patch there. :)
For me and probably most of people – Fun means fair. Its when u are loosing first battle but winning second one.
Thats why many non unicum players want skilled matchmaking (among other things like reduced rng and limited amount of gold sheels u can carry just like in real life). People want to play with others on simmilar level, to not to be on loosing side 10 times in a row or witness 15-0 battles where u cant do anything because of bad rng and skill difference.
Sure its nice to have few wins one after another, everyone like it, but think about other side, people who got loosing streak and logging out.
I would sign my name under this.
I don’t want the skill-based MM as it was pretended (unicums vs unicums etc.), but I don’t get, why MM can’t (in at least some easy way) balance at least platoons of three super unicums and so on. MM even now is able to balance for example one high tier scout with two lower tier scouts, so why don’t do the same with players? I don’t want 1:1, that wouldn’t be fun, but that’s an extreme case. What about doing it as it is doing with tanks? One very skilled player (let’s call him unicum, either I don’t like the whine about WNx stats so much, because all has it’s drawbacks) could be balanced with another skilled player, or by two or three less skilled players (lets call them good, or very good player – not yet unicum, but close to blue).
As the ian666 mentioned, most people don’t find fun every day 10 loss in a row. Nor do they like 15:0 battles, because it lasts 3 or 4 minutes and most of the time, if you don’t have very quick tank, you end up without any dmg (or very low) even if you win. At least small balance of the teams wouldn’t ommit such battles for sure, but it can help you finding adequate teams with more or less equal skills. Sure it will be mostly filled with “daddies” with few better players, just as it is now. The difference is that both teams will have +- same number of “daddies” and better players. Again, I didn’t said to put it 1:1 MM, that wouldn’t be fun as you have mentioned.
I personally don’t care so much about avarage players, I just don’t expect much from them, when they are in my team. But from time to time I am suprised what is some of them able to do. Sure, I trully started to hate all those 10k+ battles (some have even 30k+ battles) with 45% winrate camping all the game behing one building ending up with 300 DMG on tier 10. I will probably never get, how is this “fun” for anybody.
I was on same level of thoughts as you. Until I noticed, that what i actually like about WoT is the random factor as SS says.
I mean – fair fight – surely, i want that – in terms i dont want anyone botting or cheating like IDDQD or so.
But more streamlined balanced MM and those? No. I actually want to have a challenge shitty team vs good team and vice versa.
Because if i really start seriously thinking about more balanced MM, yeah, ok, for few days it will be okay.. But after that … too linear … i want to do a tomato juice there and there …..and i want to have chance fight against superior enemy. This mix is essentially something that keeps me from saying “meh, boring after some time”..
Dont u think its better to end with 15-14 result where every player on both sides contributed to battle by doing some damage / scouting, rather than battles like 15-0 where most of loosing team did 0 dmg, got like 50xp, -15k credits and feel that playing WoT is just a stupid way to loose time and get angry?.
Don’t get me wrong, I like the random factor aswell. But only at some points, while MM is not in that group of “random things I like” :). I am not asking for streamlined MM, but for some kind of balance in MM. I just dislike battles, where on one side there are platoons full of unicums (or even without platoons) and in the other side, there are only “daddies” and, of course, me. Such battles has nothing to do with fun and I must say that according to my winrate (unplatooned) for few last weeks, it is not true, that there is almost same number with good players on my side (aka win) as those with team full of not so good players.
you all think about skill mm as “all or nothing solution”
Why?
First: even with 1:1 matchmaking you will not get every battle the same. Rock:paper:scissors works even with map distribution – your teammates are going somewhere at the begining, opponents going somewhere, to the moment of first spot both teams do it blindly and on many maps which are divided geographically (westfield, karelia, abbey, cliff) this can have huge effect of the end outcome. Even without that random factor, battles 15:2 and 2:15 would happen – but less.
Second: Some diversity is good like a pinch of salt, butyou will not make a good meal out of vinegar and honey only.
The key point is proportions – I want to have most battles where I feel I made a difference or I could have make a difference. Roflstomps from time to time are acceptable but if I either have battle “meh, I didnt have time to do anything” or “fuck, it’s unfiar, retards from my team lost it before I could do anything” with nothing in between – then it is wrong too.
Skill balancing cannot be perfect. So what it will do it will reduce the number of roflstomps and increase the number of equal battles. To some extent.
I think it would be better in a long run.
Because you can claim, that people play cause they like to pwn from time to time, but everyone who plays over a year or two knows a lot of people who stopped playing because of series of annoying roflstomps.
Evenly balanced teams will mean more roflstomps. Lose your 1 good player and you are doomed.
While it may be nice for some, skill MM has one major problem especially on the NA server…server population. I already find myself getting into 12 tank matches at tier III. 6 tanks per side. With a ladder system this is what you’d be getting. The other problem is that if you’re an above average player with 52-55% winrate, or even a 49% winrate…sometimes it’s nice to play where the top skilled players are of your skill level because then you have a better chance of swaying the battle.
The way I view it, is that skill MM is like taking the +2/-2 MM spread and changing it so that there is no tier spread at all. IMO it just wouldn’t be as fun.
IMHO there is one single thing that people opposing skill MM simply do not get
it… does… not… necessarily… have… to… be… replacement… for… random… battles
I would love to see skill MM and hate the nay-sayers (WG included) for being deluded for not trying to ADD A GAME MODE (yes, ladder).
You want WG proposed random fun ? Join random.
You want to test your skill and be on guard from the very first moment? Join ladder.
It could serve as a testbed for skill MM to show playerbase there is not that much request for skill MM battles as the loud majority made it look like.
(ofc split statistics – there, problem with winratio fixed)
Introducing a new game mode will change the balance of players in random battles. That is why those of us against the idea are also against having the choice.
Silentstalker your so right, on the NA server we have what is called “Hunt the Pro” where WGLNA (pro players of World of tanks) give out gold for there death they are marked my yellow Camo,a red bulls eys on top of them where there name is/heath and they alway type a message in all chat. lets jest say i think there servival rate is like 0% and also the accounts are fully unlocked (all crew skills, max amount of gold and credits and tanks that you and myself can’t even get.) and well it’s 15 v 1 it seems every time
Read about that one once xD poor guys do they even play or do they get team killed ? :O
We had that thing too, you know. It was something like “hunt the golden tank” or similar.
But the reward was the same, you got some gold for hunting down that tank.
Tbh, even though I NEVER met such a tank/player, I kinda miss that feature.
Nice read SS.
It is always hard to accept that one is nothing when it comes to statistics. One data point, sometimes more, in a huge database.
You can only judge from your very small point of view without really getting the big picture and forget about it totally.
Ofcourse I rage about that stuff as everyone but when you played a hundret battles and your WN is decent and your WR above average (if you care) you know that in total, you have done more things right than wrong. For those below the average, they probably simply don’t care and have fun either way because: Pixel Tanks!
I agree it seems corridors are good because bads cent seem to read the minimap to see where to go. But these maps contradict the games inherent quality of skill+intelligence to win.
There really needs an option for players like me that don’t like CW/stronghold over randoms but don’t want a team of special needs players every match. A fair fight is all I want. If you want to rotflstomp bads then have at it but this is not challenging.
The competitive players who take the game more seriously likewise put disproportionately more money into this game, it’s counterintuitive to say this is not a fact.
“The competitive players who take the game more seriously likewise put disproportionately more money into this game, it’s counterintuitive to say this is not a fact.”
It’s a numbers game. For each competitive player that spends $300 per month on the game, you have 1000 “working daddies” spending $20 per month (what the family budget allows), so “whale” has no voice in the mind of WG’s management.
A “whale” leaves, big deal. 1000 “daddies” leave, the company shudders in fear.
“The competitive players who take the game more seriously likewise put disproportionately more money into this game, it’s counterintuitive to say this is not a fact.”
It is not a fact, it is a fact that the top 20 clans on NA receive about 60% of the map gold income (http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/389140-top-20-clans-by-gold-revenue-last-7-days/). For example, I receive ~1000 gold give or take a few hundred every week depending on clan income and my attendance, why would I spend money?
SS, do you really believe that “sometimes up, sometimes down” principle is valid for skill-based reballancer, too?
1. This game is for 46% daddies – and most daddies do NOT use XVM, they don’t even know what it is. So
A. They don’t know who to target
B. They don’t know the odds in advance
C. They don’t know when to rolfstomp – the only thing they know is afterwards when they can say “wow, that was fast” but still they will be on the bottom with dmg and xp most of the times
D. Most important: they do NOT like to be rolfstomped themselves – and while they don’t know in advance that it will happen, when it happens they will loudly blame their team on chat. It’s a WoT rule: the deeper red, the louder on chat – but still a clear sign they didn’t like being rolfstomped.
2. If you are a unicum, you definitely use XVM and know whom to target – that argument wasn’t well-thought ;) .
3. Even if you are unicum minority and you love rolfstomping, you don’t like being rolfstomped too, just like tomatoes. And most satisfying battles are those that you say afterwards “wow, that was hard but we managed”. And if you didn’t manage, after such battle you think that it was still good enough, only “down this time” – if you and your team performed hard (unless it’s a loosing streak of course, whey you go out of your mind in every case).
4. With reballancer it will still be “sometimes up, sometimes down”, even more levelled – and not determined in advance by players composition. It will still be up to map and tank composition and tiers. Player-wise, outcome will be even more random than it is now.
5. The other thing that reballancer would to is make battles longer – and i can understant that WG may not want that.
1. Yes.
A: True, but with “balanced” skill MM (same skill on both sides), the other side will have at least one skilled player if you enter the battle in any case. If the skill MM is public (a part of the “daddies” is at least aware of its existence from – say – a launcher post) and the skilled player tells them who to target while you don’t tell your people, your are at an disadvantage.
B: See A
C: Not sure how that is related to skill MM in principle
D: Well, I wouldn’t go as far as the “well known rule” (most players are simply silent), but, again, this neither supports nor opposes skill MM
2. So EVERY skilled player (which does NOT equal “unicum”, mind you) uses XVM? I seriously doubt that. But see what is wrong here? A WG mechanism requiring you to use a 3rd party software.
3. “most satisfying battles are those that you say afterwards “wow, that was hard but we managed”” – yes, unless you have EVERY battle on the edge. That is just tiring.
4. You are removing a RNG factor, therefore decreasing the “sometimes up, sometimes down” rule. Is there an objective need to decrease it?
5. Yes, definitely a factor, but for the sake of discussion I disregarded that.
1A. Sometimes life sucks ;) . It happens already and it may happen in future, so it’s not an argument for or against.
1C. It was counter to your argument. And it’s relevant because reballancer removes rolfstomps.
1D. Valid part is that nobody likes to be rolfstomped and daddies do not differ in this.
2. Wasn’t that some time ago in Q&A that 80% of playerbase use some mod? I’d say that majority of good players use XVM and if they don’t, it’s their choice.
And reballancer doesn’t force you to use anything more than now – it’s your choice again. If you want to be better, if you want to win more often, if you want to know whom to target – just like now. If you won’t, it will be for you just like it is now – unknown opponents, white names on playersPanel and statisticForm – only balanced.
3. Yes, it is demanding. More stress, more adrenaline – so, more tiring. But, more satisfying, again ;) – and this game as every other entertainment is about satisfaction. And of course, less battles played, because they last longer; so maybe some economy rebalance (better missions is easiest, but we go too far beyond now :P ).
4. There is enough RNG with tiers, tanks composition and maps to satisfy that rule. And i repeat: outcome will be even more random that it is now, from global perspective. WR will level out even more – do you need stronger proof of randomness?
See, the thing is, different players play for different reasons and they don’t find the same things enjoyable.
SS was talking about a “relaxing” experience where the highlights include times “like that awesome moment when you get to your favourite position with a vehicle, that has a certain advantage on that particular map and you know this is just great, because first enemies are starting to appear right before the barrel of your gun”.
You are talking about greater stress and adrenaline making it more satisfying (due to it being more thrilling and exciting, it seems).
I personally prefer excitement, as well. I love challenges and I love pushing myself to my limits. I never want to do anything relaxing, I want things to be as intense as we can make them. As they say, “I’ll sleep when I’m dead”. Same goes for relaxing.
But that’s me. I understand that there are many players on both sides of this and many also somewhere in the middle. If the target audience of the game is truly everyone, then they need to think about both types of players.
And no, SS, players that want an intense experience aren’t just players that take the game very seriously. Some people just like intensity in general and they’re a much larger portion of the world population than your descriptions and explanations seem to account for.
Get rid of all in-game mods and you’ll see that the difference between current “unicums”/stat padders and “tomatoes” will be significantly less. So much info is given through mods that is not available to vanilla client players, it’s unreal. THAT is what often makes or breaks battles.
The cat already got out of the bag and you cannot get him back. You cannot get rid of stats, you cannot get rid of WR. Even if i remove mods, i only put myself at disadvantage as majority is and still will be using them.
And, without mods for everyone, battles would still be disbalanced as they are now, only you woudn’t be able to notice the real cause.
Believe me, unicums will be still unicums, with mods or without them. I played roughly 80 percrnt of games vanilla and still pwn. Yeah, mods help, but every truly unicum player would manage to do well without them. Maybe they will be even better, because opposite, skillwise worse players would be not able to use them too, which would make the gap between those two groups even bigger
Than maybe i’m not an unicum. Are you ok with that?
I do what i do, mods are legal.
Your answer is pretty interesting, I’ll get back to it when I have a bit more time.
Thanks for noticing :) . This is an old idea so i thought about it quite a bit and it seems worth trying at least.
WG can always pull it back like historical battles or national ;) …
OMG SS U SUX YOLO YOLO =]]
I disagree with the corridor part of the post. We all admit that some maps will favor some vehicles. I’m fine if I get a roughly equitable distribution of maps, and if my light tank does get onto Severagorsk then if I get onto Steppes next battle then I’m happy. Nobody rational denies that this has to happen for appropriate balance and you are correct in pointing that out.
The issue that comes in is that there are too many corridor maps, not that they exist. Instead of one game being on Severagorsk, you get Severagorsk, then Ensk, then Himmelsdorf, then Hidden Village, then Windstorm, then Sacred Valley in a row, and then maybe one all-right game on Malinovka (Which is getting changed to make lights less useful there) in your 13 90. Few complain about the existence of corridor maps, it is their prevalence that is of concern, and the fact that Wargaming seems set to continue to expand their numbers.
There should be a balance of maps in the game, and corridor maps will be part of that, but I am convinced and remained convinced that they have multiplied to an extent that is overly large and harms said balance.
Cannot agree more.
That’s true. Corridor map complaints started only after WG went bonkers and changed some maps and introduced some new maps that were corridors. People might not like Abbey or Himmelsdorf, but they perceived these maps just as a part of the game. It was all quiet until recently. The complaints started after certain threshold of corridor maps and corridor changes has been reached. People clearly got overwhelmed by ever so growing number of such maps to the point where they started to get vocal about it. And so the “corridor whine” took it’s current shape.
It really is as simple as cause and effect. When WG overdo certain aspects of the game the playerbase will get vocal about it. Same happened with high alpha tanks for example. There always have been some high alpha tanks in the game. But it was tolerated. It sucked to get hit by one, but it was far in between. But then WG introduced more of these hard hitting tanks and suddenly people expressed their disapproval. Then there were certain changes to help resolve the problem. And now we have corridor maps. Once WG realises they overdid it they will try to make changes and it will get quiet again … until they fuck something up again. And then we will have new whine. It is hardly people’s imagination or their whiny nature. It’s a simple response to objective changes introduced by WG.
SS, regarding maps: procedural terrain and map generation – does it ring a bell? As a separate mode.
Yeeeeeeeeeeeea….. I think that would probably be cool, but way, WAY too hard to make maps balanced like that – even if Bigworld was technically capable of that, it would probably insanely difficult to program.
It shouldn’t be that hard. I’d say half a year for normal team of programmers and you have a working version.
Maps would be definitely more simple, more dull and less eye-candy, but different every time and minute disbalances wouldn’t be that important as you cannot learn them and use again.
And, they have to think about that or someone else makes that first and than it will be too late. WoT has strong position but there is a difference in maintaining it by providing good content and just milking the cow.
Random maps don’t have to be very balanced. Since every time it would be a new map it would take a lot of sit awareness and game knowledge to take an advantage of specific imbalances. It’s easier now, because there are players out there literally studying each map square by square to use and abuse the terrain to the full potential of specific tanks. On randomly generated map there owuld be no time for that. What would count would be personal skill and team cooperation.
We already have random teams and RNG. Map randomness would add up to that, but only by little. On the other hand the “freshness”, so to speak, of every battle would in my opinion far outweigh the cons of random factors affecting one’s performance.
Also from spectator point of view, imagine the tournaments played on such maps, perhaps shown to players 5 minutes before the actual battle, tank diversity, fast thinking and improvisation. It would be far more entertaining to watch that current games that are really carbon copies of each other, only sometimes looking slightly different.
People play WoT cause they need their fix. Suffering 10 battles with corridor BS, 15-0 or 0-15 stomps, RNG screwing you over, et cetera, just to get the one game of glory where everything clicked and you had great fun. Sadly, if you’re not into the “games of glory” thing and would rather have decent games overall, you will get frustrated a lot and facepalm hard.
On the corridor subject, I know you disagree on it, but most purples really really hate corridor maps too, unless they are die-hard HT players (which aren’t that popular among cums anyway). Like it or not, WG caters to your typical 45% 200Wn8 KV-1S/IS/IS-3 player by creating maps that shield them from EVERYTHING except frontal pekaboom. No worries about getting spotted, flanked, sniped – all irrelevant. And catering to zombies is not cool, sorry. In games like SC2, nobody cares about trash players, in WoT it’s quite the opposite – everything is aimed to please zombies, nobody cares for good players.
First, you write that corridor maps are thereto make the game more beginner-friendly. In the next sentence, you say that, in order to do well on those maps as a light tank, you need to be a very good player. That doesn’t make sense to me.
For every class, there are maps that are good for them and maps where this class struggles. As soon as an enexperienced player reaches T4, where battles start to be more than driving forward, he will struggle on maps that are bad for his tank. If you say that in certain types of tanks on certain maps, you need to be pr0 in order to enjoy driving it, you negate your own argument: If the game should be newb-friendly, why should there be maps that make it exceptionally hard for not-so-good players to succeed?
Little thing , now Ob 430 have best rof . 9.38 , 140 and 62 have only 9.09 will it stay or it’s a mistake. Silent ?
Since 9.3, SS balances vehicles.
So hard to find patchnotes, so difficult, so uneasy, impossible.
I know that they wanted to balance it.
But i was sure they want to make it same as other 2 , not 3000 dpm.
They decreased it’s accuracy and bloom to compensate.
I disagree on the Hidden Village. It’s a great map for every class: TDs have things to snipe, lights have something to scout, heavies are doing their thing in the eastern corridor, mediums in the village, even arty has targets (heavies). And often I find myself in the teams that use different deployment than this which also work.
My friend and I who run scouts and mediums in a wolfpack despise Ruinberg much more. The map’s just too claustrophobic to do anything on that damn hellhole of a field. Every single position puts you in check, so to speak.
See? It’s completely subjective.
TLDR
Nice rant, old man. But all that fun having GREATLY DEPENDS ON EVERY PERSON, so don’t expect anyone to have the same opinion as yourself.
I personally prefer that everyone has equal chances, all tanks same tier, both teams equally skilled (and that’s excluding me ffs, I’m sick and tired of being put in the team specifically to raise the average), I like a game where the skill makes the difference, not the bigger tank. I loved those past full T7 heavies battles.
The only way you can have same tier now is to play CW, I’m not into that, or to play T10 randoms where everyone camps and wait to be killed by the camping arty. Oh joy, how fun those games are.
Thanks, youngster!
And I don’t :)
Young man, so you don’t like challenges I guess. Life does not present everybody with equal chances. Sometimes you have fight against all odds.
Looks like you represent generation which feels is entitle to all what is good. No hard work, no obstacles, no challenges, no difficult problems and decisions. Just smooth ride. I have bad news for you, life doesn’t work like that. You adapt or you will become extinct.
I can deal with corridors or not having the best tank for a particular map easy enough. What I cannot deal is the often MASSIVE disparity between the abilities of players in both teams.
Sure, I can see having RNG decide the teams but NOT if the odds are so overwhelmingly stacked against you. Easy to say it is fulfilling to win when at a disadvantage but often times the odds are just impossible.
If we want RNG to run this game, let the overall difference in skill between teams be no more than 25% just like how it does for penetration and damage. Lets use the totally useful WG rating system and let it apply for each tier that the MM makes.
Lets just say the MM already decided on a Tier 8 match’s team composition. It will then look at the say the Tier 8s in both teams and shuffle them around so there is only a max 25% difference between them. Of course, balancing vehicle types takes precedence over this.
Then the MM would look at the tier 7s and then the Tier 6s that would be in a tier 8 match. I would gladly wait an extra 10-20 seconds if for a match where the odds are just overwhelmingly stacked against me that my team and I can do shit.
Also, in cases of low server population, MM can choose not to use this skilled balancing MM. I just want a system in place to at least make it fair. Lose streaks really should never happen.
“I would gladly wait an extra 10-20 seconds if for a match where the odds are just overwhelmingly stacked against me that my team and I can do shit.”
Oops, meant to say “I would gladly wait an extra 10-20 seconds for a match that isn’t overwhelmingly stacked against me that my team and I can’t do shit.”
What about this: to support SS points
- I have 14,500 or so battles, 51.6 WR
- never used training room, never watched videos, just trial and error
- I don’t care about maps, MM or RNG
- I don’t use XVM or anything else, I don’t see other players stats, ratings etc…
- I use regular shells, gold if I want to
- I buy whatever I want, premiums acct, gold, premium tanks
- I don’t care if I lose or win. Win some, lose some like in life.
- I don’t care about 15-0 or 0-15 games, its just the number
- AND I HAVE FUN! Because I like that game. I want to drive and shoot tanks.
And I believe that if you are getting upset because of the map, RNG, WR, WN8 etc…playing internet game then you need to evaluate your priorities.
Yes, this game is for an average player who wants to just drive around pixel tank and wants to shoot another pixel tank.
And if you want reality, skill MM, and you hate “noobs”, “tomatos”, “oleni”, “jelenie”, “raki” and whatever you call them, then join professional team and play on professional level.
Other than that just enjoy the game and have FUN!, Yes FUN!
And I bet that WG will cater more to players like me than for unicums(what a cheese description of the self-center dorks). Because WG like my $. And $ is what All is about.
That is your definition of fun and there is nothing wrong with that. I too don’t really care about the maps, or being in a vehicles not really suitable for that map or what not.
For me, I like winning and this game is a competitive game with a loser and winner. I get fun from winning.
Losing a close match is still fun but losing because the teams aren’t fair is not fun. Losing match after match because the MM cannot equalise the teams as much as possible is not fun.
I am not trying to say you are wrong for what makes things fun for you but it does not apply to everyone else. Furthermore, I too have spent a butt load of money on WoT and I am not a unicum. Who is to say WG prefers your money over mine?
What I’m saying is that SS is correct saying that this game is cater to the “average Joe”. And WG more likely will make those “average Joe’s” happy than some self-absorb super players.
Of course winning is better that losing but in this internet game who do you want to impress? Do you want to feel better about yourself?
Now I will go and I will play few games. Maybe I will “zerg” with fast tanks, or maybe I will just go into the middle of the biggest fight just to create chaos and confusion or just ram someone.
Let see what mess can I create, let go “nuts”. And that’s what I’m calling FUN!
Like I said, all the power to you. If all of what you did gives you a win, hell, even better! However, just going nuts that doesn’t do anything for the team is just a waste. Especially so if you pointlessly throw a vital tank to the team. Then you ruin the fun for everyone else in your team. And this is a team game, you want to do something “fun” just for your own fun, while ruining the fun of the other players in your team, then you might as well play a single player game.
The “average Joe” is such a broad term. I would consider myself an average Joe. I am not good enough for super clans or esports. Heck, my clan is just about getting together with friends to play games. That doesn’t mean I get satisfaction from just going “nuts” but not get a win out of it.
Different people have different things they consider fun. Some would get fun from jet skiing. Others get it from reading a book or even building and painting plastic model kits.
WG shouldn’t just cater to just your version of the “average Joe” but everyone else. The “self-absorb super players have clan wars, campaigns and e-sports. What about the guys in between like me whom get fun from winning?
Me wanting to win doesn’t mean I want to impress anybody. Maybe I want to feel good about myself (since my bad knee prevents me from doing sports). Doesn’t feeling good come from winning? Just because it is an internet game, doesn’t make it any lesser from winning a chess game or a tennis tournament. Different strokes for different people. I play this game because there is competition and against other real opponents, I want to win.
When I have enough of WoT, I can go play Diablo 3 which is fun as well, smashing through monsters and demons. There is technically no winning in there but it is still fun nonetheless.
So yeah, stop trying to make it seem your fun is the right or only kind of fun here.
SilentStalker, your problem is that you think people can’t see the big picture and write a post without a clue of what big picture is. You can’t talk about the big picture without taking into account that the game has 5 classes of vehicles, and it is absolutely terrible when most of these maps gets reworked for 1 or 2 classes. All the maps should be made in such a way that it is fun to everyone regardless of the class your are playing. There should be run for everybody. Dumbing the gameplay down with the excuse of making the maps more noob friendly is not seeing the big picture. You can even take a part of skill MM insider discussion and apply here.
As for the T37 battle in NorthWest. Did the guy succeeded in that match playing his ligh t tank as a crippled medium tank or as a scout. I know the answer, but think about it. Imagine the noob playing his light tank on that map. And then next map is Tundra, then El Halluf, Severogorsk, Hidden Village….then he get a Malinovka which is great for scouting…..for now, because it is gonna become really terrible in the near future.
“All the maps should be made in such a way that it is fun to everyone regardless of the class your are playing.” – no. That would mean monotonous game, boring as hell. (Because every map feels the same.)
“Did the guy succeeded in that match playing his ligh t tank as a crippled medium tank or as a scout” – hopefully both?! Light tanks are called “light tanks” and not “scouts” for a reason:
They are lighter so more maneuverable. Reducing them to “scouts” rips them of half the fun and rewarding gameplay. Scout is a role in a battle. Assassin is too – and light tanks (first and foremost the new ones) can perform multiple roles in a battle.
You sound like one of those guys who flames an amx12t because he is not “sitting there in that bush and scouts” but drives around kills everything and deals 3k+ damage, just because you have a broken understanding of classes and roles.
If i get in tier 10 matches in my Löwe i love to do passive scouting. Why? Because my Löwe has 472m view range.
It’s monotonous when you’re not useless , like arty on himmel or scouts on Pearl river?
WTF are you smoking man?
maybe it’s for those people who like BDSM gaming, but not for me.
lol Passive scouting in a Lowe. That tells me everything.
And wtf is wrong with you? Making the map fun for everyone = boring. Are you retarded?
Pick all the good maps and see if they all feel the same.
Damn these baddies.
Sorry, but I don’t love to *roflstomp* the enemy team.
I find games like that even more boring than being completly outclassed with <30% WinChance. At least there I can camp and waste the idiots from the other side who only saw the pink %-number and try exactly that: to roflstomp.
“And yet, only yesterday, I was in a battle where the opposing team had a T37 with a player from Odem Mortis. That guy absolutely dominated (it was really great gameplay, IIRC 6 kills and top damage of his team) and it was only because the rest of his team folded that we brought him down in the end. It’s completely possible to play well on such a map – IF you are good enough.”
“Odem Mortis”
“IF you are good enough.”
It’s not a very good example of a light tank doing well on corridor map, played by an average player …. now is it?
No, it’s a proof that on that map, a light tank can do a lot of damage even though it’s not exactly a good map for it. I never said that average players have to do good on a light tank on every map, quite the opposite.
In the article:
“In any case, the corridors are simply a method of making the map more inexperienced user friendly”
Your reply:
“I never said that average players have to do good on a light tank on every map, quite the opposite.”
Then I must assume it is somehow fine to fuck up whole light tank class, along with many paper meds and td’s, just for the sake of making the game easier for the average skilled players who happen to be driving better armoured tanks or the ones with better alpha damage? That’s like intentionally disregarding a third of the game content for the sake of protecting average players from the dangers of encountering someone more skilled than them.
And so it has nothing to do with actual improving the game. It’s a step towards a “toss the coin (with a tank picture on it)” game.
This is exactly my opinion.
Silentstalker, you seem to have the wrong idea about corridor maps: I’m not complaining about the corridors itself, but how they are made. It’s right that players should have to choose between different routes, but this choice shouldn’t be permanent. Many reworked maps have the tendency to introduce corridors which are detached from the rest of the map.
Severogorsk, for example, was one of my favourite maps before they “improved” it. It was far away from perfect but imho better balanced than nowadays.
The two hills made it great for hulldown tactics and teams pushing to far on either the right or left flank made themselves vulnerable to fire from the other flank or the middle. This made pushing harder and equaled the flanks even if they weren’t equally stocked with tanks of one team. Those cutout “windows” on the corridor also covered the city and stopped assaults from there.
In comparison to that the reworked variant is really bad. Differences in the amount of tanks of each team on one flank most likely decide the result of the battle within the first three minutes. Playing arty from the south base is horrible: your teammates are stuck in the “corridors” while a single tank pushing though the center is killing everyone in base. Supporting one flank from the other flank is impossible. This map now is most of the time a pain in the ass especially without great armor or alpha to win the peak-a-boo battles.
Most of the map changes seem to favor this static gameplay while open “windows” or flanks are cut out.
It should be possible to make this game a little bit noob-friendly without taking all dynamic elements out of the game.
Does writing a wall of text about something your are clueless about increase your site traffic that much that you just can’t quit it? Seriously, stick to the translations and Q&A. That’s the thing we all started visiting this blog for.
What about creating your own blog, eh? Will see how interesting that will be.
Does writing you I am clueless make you any happier? Seriously, if you don’t like it, don’t read it. Traffic is irrelevant to me at this point.
At this point, I am considering such pointless comments to be trolling. In fact, I think that it is the unicums (like you I assume) who are completely clueless in not seeing the bigger picture and I hope they will continue to be ignored.
I think your taking it personally (and Medjed is trolly), though I can see it from his perspective and be cordial. Do you think a high-school football (European) player has the same importance and validity of opinion about the sport as the professional players? I’d say no.
Myself and all the players (blues/purples) I know on NA prefer a good fight over a stomp in a pub/clan match any day. It is almost always the 45% tomatoes at the end of a stomp who say “gg” because they actually got a win in. You should go play with some of your fellow EU unicums, they understand the mechanics very well. And part of the mechanics is map balance (or unbalance depending on the side of a map). We play and win even when the odds are stacked because we play to win and enjoy tough fights too. This is why our stats are better, because we dig in and eke out those wins.
I am not even sure this is a serious post? :) I mean, you don’t seriously think players balance this game according to unicum needs? :)
Such useless hate towards unicums. Anyone can think of himself as really smart and knowledgeable about all things. Only a few really are. Who knows better? Someone who is good at all classes and has played lots of vehicles or an average player who doesn’t know exactly why he is average?
Not sure what you mean. I’m in favor of some type skill or league based team balance, even the WG rating would be adequate. It doesn’t make sense to put a youth soccer team (reds) with messi (purple) vs. Barcelona (blues/purples) with one kid (red). Messi can’t carry them no matter how well he plays.
I haven’t read it since i don’t really cared about the matter discussed in the article, but i’m just noticing lately a lot of articles of this kind and all the stats etc being publicly available for everyone to see only reason i see in this is that you are trying to have some kind of your own vendeta on all the “unicum jerks” by writing articles that are likely to be well accepted by average-bad players that will then proceed to grow even bigger hatred towards better players. I’m reading this blog mainly for the info such as Q&As and i like that part of it. What i don’t like is when i see an article about some sensitive subject writen by a player that don’t possess certain knowledge/skill to claim his facts as one and only truth. And if you think articles of this kind don’t generate traffic for FTR check what articles have most comments. I give you a credit for that SS. You do know how to make profit and i’d do the same if i ran my own thing, but just to say this as politely as i can “cut the crap” man.
u sux haow do u dare 2 rite ur opiniun men, gib all pleyers fri gold n moneyzzz wg iz krap yknow, sthap defendink there azz
prokhorovka is an ok map without arty, but when 3 tier10 is on, you just get clicked if you are seen. i can agree with the other parts, after lots of losses you will appreciate godlike-carry battles more
SS you have it all wrong. Skill MM is not about 15 unicums vs 15 unicums, 15 green vs 15 green or solely 15 tomatoes vs 15 tomatoes.
Skill MM is about having approx. same skill teams. Problem is NOT tomatoes in game BUT rather balance of skilled players in team. E.g. 12 tomatoes + 3 green vs 9 tomatoes + 6 unicums. Now try to say which one team has better chance for win. Skill MM is not about making special battles for players of certain skills, rather than EVENLY balance skill of all players in game into two teams.
But that’s what I write about. Please read it again. What you propose is that if you are good player, you will never see a battle where the opponent has no good players. That’s not a good thing for the reasons described above.
some very good point s in this like the point about not every map can suit every playstyle like i for example hate prokhorovka so much because i have found no way to be aggressive on that map that will allow you to survive to the end it usually revolves around you sacrificing your tank to break the boring stalemate so that your team will shoot at the invisible tanks on the 1-2 line or the tanks that camp watching the hill from the 7-8 line will be spotted. you usually wind up getting nothing for your sacrifice because your team normally waits until your dead to move. but i can see how other people like it no because they prefer the defensive playstyle (i usually end up thinking of it as the campy bitch game play) but if thats how they enjoy the game then they shoul but i hate camping so much i am way more aggressive than i should be in this game.
for example i killed an IS-2 and jagdpanther and an amx 12t earlier today in my chaffee with only180hp to be killed by a base camping vk3001h that moved about 25meters from spawn then sat still. this was infuriating for me because some one who had did nothing until then just killed me but it worked for him so why not?
by the way the chaffee this patch is a lot of fun even stock i cam enjoying the speed and maneuverability with the nice little gun. i never played it hen it was the tier 5 super scout but because i dont have theat bias i can say its a very competitive little tier 5 scout it has roughly the same pen as the leopard but has a 76mm instead of a 30mm auto cannon so its different and interesting to play. (didnt mention the elc because its a td gun on a go kart)
Developer brew is a heady drink and can easily befuddle those not used to it.
The developers say that perfectly balanced games (if such were attainable) would be boring. They are correct. Each match would come down to the RNG and *nobody* would enjoy that.
This is not the same as saying ROFLstomp games are a good thing. They aren’t. Typically the top players get all the glory, the poor players on the winning side get positive reinforcement for bad ideas (e.g., “pushing the valley in Lakeville worked so well in that one game that I should do it every time!”), and the losing team gets frustrated.
So too balanced is bad. Complete unbalance is bad. What you want to aim for is something in the middle, but that’s tricky– and that’s what the whole argument is about. And because it is tricky, WG are trying to find out if it is worth the work.
I don’t think ladders are the answer. I don’t think matching the skill levels of each side player for player is the answer either (and it would be very difficult to do anyway).
The path I would pursue is trying to approximately balance the average skill level of each side. One side might have a couple of really good players and a lot of bad ones, the other might be all average. Or you could have a lot of really good players on each side. Or a lot of really bad players. It doesn’t matter as long as they have a nearly even chance to win based on skill.
You can play with what “nearly even” means. I think 45/55 is definitely OK. Maybe a little more. An 70% or 80% chance to win for one side is clearly not OK.
This also has the advantage of being pretty easy (though platoons complicate things a bit). You mostly can form the match using the current system and then swap players between sides to balance.
A balanced fair fight is bad? You can’t be serious. The worst game is when I’m not challenged because of team composition.
I must say, that I agree with most of the article.
But I find the idea of a skill based MM nonetheless intriguing. Yesterday I had a Tier X match on El Halluf with a lot of good players on both sides. While I did not have a good game, because I had to defend the flank with less tanks, I liked how the game developed. My flank eventually fell, but we won on the other. But the best was, that after they won their flank, they split up to cover our own cap against the enemy meds. This simple map awareness made it a great game for me. Simply because my sacrifice was not in vain.
I can live with an enemy team that outplayed us, even a superior team that oblitareted mine, but what I can’t stand are lost victories. For that reason, I find the idea of a skill based MM interessting, but I can also live with the current MM. Because, as it was said, good players find a way to make it work.
I personally don’t think “skilled MM” as mentioned is the way to go about it… maybe “balanced” would be more appropriate..
Been saying this for awhile now..
MM takes 15 players, throws them in the query, then grabs the next 15 players, and poof, there is your other team. now, if MM had a brain, which im pretty sure it does to an extent. it takes the 30 players selected for that match, and balances the teams based on their personal rating. yea yea yea, I’ve heard it a million time that PR is a joke, but in all honesty, its pretty reliable in this situation.
play on that “special” team, and then after the match, look up the personal rating of all the players on your team, then divide by 15.. then do the same for the other team. now go ahead, and move a few players back and forth to get the numbers somewhat even +/- 2k and see what you have.. I guarantee, the match up won’t be so painful.
Yea PR can be inflated blah blah blah…what can’t be. but in the end, that guy that’s inflating his PR is still going to be a decent player..show me somebody with a inflated PR, but is total garbage. if u can’t, then your argument isn’t worth spit. on the other hand, show me a player with a super low PR, that is actually really good. again, if u can’t, then don’t even make an argument against it because all your doing is looking like a fool, and some noob who is riding the hot topic for the day, but has no clue why.
SS is fundamentally wrong in his assumption about what casual players want.
“Why are you having fun? Is it because you win?”
Yes, everyone would prefer winning to losing.
“It’s when odds are stacked in your favour that a lot (most) players actually have fun.”
“You see, even though few would admit it, people LOVE to roflstomp the enemy team.”
This is incorrect. Why would ANYONE want a team that was guaranteed victory? There are plenty of reasons why this appeals to very few people. If my team is objectively better than our opponents, so much so that we’re guaranteed to win at least 15-5, if not 15-0, then odds are the kills on our team are going to be highly concentrated. In fact, this will lead to an extremely frustrating scenario; my team wins, but I (and at least a third of the team) achieve virtually nothing; hardly any damage, no kills, no spotting, etc.
I have anecdotal evidence to support this (and NO ONE has statistically significant evidence to support or oppose SS’s claim or my claim, because WoT’s playerbase is so large there hasn’t been a poll with sufficient sample size, and even if there were such a large poll it would has self-selection problems). My little brother and I played together just a few days ago for about an hour. In the year+ we’ve been playing, he’s managed less than 2k battles, and I’ve managed less than 4k. Neither of us (being adults with too many other obligations) have time to be ultra-competitive in this game. Despite being casual players, we both do well (obviously we aren’t playing at tier 10, in CW, etc.; highest tank either of us has is a single tier 8) and in most battles get at least one kill apiece, have at least 1/1 damage/health ratio in most our tanks. Anyway, a few days ago we had 8 victories in a row. And we hated it, because in NONE of them were we able to have a great game. We constantly ended up unable to contribute greatly to our team’s success because our team was simply too good. In almost every battle, a third of our team (including us) might as well have not been there, because the other two-thirds so thoroughly dominated the other team. ******Winning isn’t fun if there isn’t the threat of losing******
SS’s statement is only half-true. People DO love to roflstomp the enemy, if they specifically, and not their entire team, get to do it. Then again, which would you rather win? A game where you breeze through unchallenged, or a game where through solid play you manage to win despite the competence of the opposing player? It doesn’t matter so much to most people whether their team comes from behind 3-7 and pulls out a win; people care much more about their individual performance/experience. If I’m in my T1 Heavy and I have a good brawl with another T1 Heavy, and I manage to kill him with only a quarter of my own health remaining, that’s much more satisfying than chewing through him while he bounces every shot trying to pen my tracks.
Skill-based MM has two huge advantages; it allows players to play AGAINST players of similar strength, and it allows players to play WITH players of similar strength (on the same team). It will naturally cause bots to end up with bots (or really, really bad players), decent players (like myself) to end up with decent players, more competitive players to end up with more competitive players, and unicums with unicums. This will make games less likely to end in one-sided victories/defeats, which will make games more enjoyable for most people. After all, the only people who would stand to lose from this are the people who do all the killing/damage in one-sided match, and that’s no more than 25% of a single match’s population.
I’d rather have utility spread out across more games than concentrated into a few. Skill-based MM would also make getting 6 kills all the more enjoyable, because you would know you’d actually accomplished something, and not just mopped up a bunch of kids/bots.
” People DO love to roflstomp the enemy, if they specifically, and not their entire team, get to do it” – not really. People just want to have the feeling they did. You underestimate the sense of self-delusion.
The rest is your opinion – you are entitled to it.
I hadn’t considered that (the self-delusion). I still don’t think enough people will be that deluded, given that we can see everyone’s stats at the end of a game. But maybe you’re right.
A skill-based MM won’t entirely eliminate one-sided matches, though, it will just make them occur less frequently. And if those delusional people end up near the bottom of the the skill pool (which I imagine is where they would end up), shouldn’t the sheer lack of skill on the part of all those bad players result in a lot of matches where one team happens to roll over the other? Higher-skilled players should have closer matches, since less mistakes will be made and tanks will be traded more equally. Lower-skilled players should have matches with more random results, since lower-skilled players make more mistakes/bad decisions, which causes more disparate match results.
“SS is fundamentally wrong in his assumption about what casual players want.”
+1
Every theory about what people want is just BS theory. People need to be given an alternative, and let them choose. Then you will see what they REALLY want.
I play WoT because it has tanks. I play it a lot. It is the only MMO I play. However, I don’t play WoT instead of WoW because the game theory behind level design, mechanics, etc is superior in WoT vs WoW, I play WoT because it has tanks and WoW does not. Period. And everyone I personally know who plays WoT does so for the same reason. People I know who tried WoT and gave up, did so because it had tanks, and did not appeal to them. So, regardless of how WoT maps are designed, or tanks are balanced, etc., I will keep playing until I have an alternative TANK game that I like better.
“Every theory about what people want is just BS theory.” – so I guess the entire advertising business built around predicting what people want is just BS as well? :) Oh man.
“Every theory about what people want is just BS theory.”
While I appreciate your agreement with respect to WoT, you claim I quoted is not true, except in the strictly individual sense. For a large population, with an adequate sample size, you can with great confidence claim what the population wants. There will be a few individuals that deviate from your expectations, but they will be in the (usually quite small) minority.
The problem is WoT’s population is so large we have no reliable information on what people want, and getting that information is almost impossible. WG doesn’t have it, either. So SS wrote about why he thinks skill-based MM would not be a good idea, and has only his own opinion/reasoning to support this (same as those of us disagreeing with him). The question isn’t whether SS is correct, it’s whether he’s accurately describing the majority of players (as he claims) or if he is just describing a small minority of players (which is what you and I, and several other comments, claim). I’m sure some people do think exactly as SS has described, I just don’t believe there are very many people like that.
Regarding El Halluf: I don’t like the reworked map, it was just about perfect before they reworked it. I liked the more defensive gameplay in previous iterations of this map.
I think the main problem with corridor based maps is that they limit gameplay for scouts and SPGs. I would like to see cliffs become more rounded so that scouts could ascend them, and arty could more easily shoot over them.
As for skill based mm, it might be fun if it was done properly, and if it was a mode like encounter that you could disable if it turned out not to be any fun.
“I think the main problem with corridor based maps is that they limit gameplay for scouts and SPGs.”
They don’t, if there are enough intertwined corridors – which is currently about 95% of maps.
Yes, it means you have to move with your arty (staying in cap means you’re pretty much useless) and wait a bit with your LT (rushing a corridor with LT in the start = almost certain death) – which some players are unable to do. Bad for them.
Just yesterday, I had a great game with 59-16 on Severogorsk – waited a bit, seen tanks in one corridor, tanks in other, then a large group in city – time to go through the central valley 5 minutes in. Got right in the back, must have passed some 100m away from enemy WZ-111-4 – and got in back of Löwe and easily set it on fire and disturbed defenses enough that our forces were more easily able to push through. It was way easier than it’d be on “old” Severogorsk, where tanks would spot me from both hills – I just had to be patient for that.
I know how to drive LTs and SPGs, and I do fairly well in them usually. I just get annoyed when driving my LT’s and having many hills barricaded off.
Very well thought out and right on the Mark Frank. I am in 100% agreement, except one thing, Himmilsdorf is one of my favorite maps for Arty. It took awhile to get there, but I have found my spots.
Appy
” You see, even though few would admit it, people LOVE to roflstomp the enemy team.”
That’s also tied to how human mind works.
Heck, I’m tired of seeing crybabes writing stuff like: “40-45% wr, we lost, no reason to play, FUCK MM and WG!!! :((” but I’ve yet to see someone writing: “yay, 55-60% wr, hooray!!! Praise MM!!!”
No-one will remember roflstomping the enemy team, or owning a top tier tank with a 2 tiers lower tank, or carrying a match alone, or being lucky over something bad that might’ve happened etc.
People will only remember when they got roflstomped, when they got owned by a top tier in their little tank, when they die, doing nothing because of the almighty “bad temz” and when they lose because of the same luck that saved their ass in the previous match.
But, apart from that and leaving out all my thoughts about how skill MM will render either all the stats or only some of them useless, I wonder how people can see skill matchmaking working in the RNG enviroment that WoT has? And now I’m talking from the point of view of all the ways the skill MM could be implemented…From full leagues/ladders to the so called “balanced teams”…
And about the maps…am I the only one that gives no fucks about how many corridors they have?…I’m just adapting ffs…
McAuliffe and Luttwitz didn’t get together before the Battle of the Bulge to decide which entrance to Bastogne was fair. They took the circumstances that were handed to them, and they did their best.
That is the appeal of the game! Certain maps – and certain tank matchups – are intrinsically UNFAIR. If it was up to me, the random pubbie games would have lots more maps, some of them obviously biased to one spawn, some of them horrible for certain tank types, some of them on the verge of being unplayable. WG’s sole responsibility would be to make sure the distribution of games and matchups are more-or-less random and unbiased. WG could save their efforts in “balancing” for the maps used in competitive games.
Also: Richtofen didn’t get to request only unicums when he went up in the air. Skill based MM is stupid. Good players should win, and bad players should either learn or lose.
I’m one of those people who, yes, enjoys a good roflstomp every now and then (Particularly when I’ve been on a losing streak where the teams I’ve been on have lost in the standard 3 kills to 15 way), but the fights I always enjoy, win or lose, are those exceedingly rare beauties that are a good game, ie; the winning team has maybe 3 or 4 tanks left alive at the end of the fight tops, and all of them are at least around 50% HP. I crave those battles. And I think that’s part of the reason why it can annoy me when I see the enemy typing “gg” in a roflstomp, or even in the standard 3:15 loss, because to me that just comes across as taunting. When I’m on the winning side of those, if anything, I type gj, or good job team, and I don’t type it in all chat.
“people LOVE to roflstomp the enemy team”
Bullshit right there. People like beating the enemy big yes, but nobody likes thost 70%/30% games that are over in less than a minute. Those games are boring as hell, no fun and if you are not in the exact right spot you can come out of such a match without any damage done because the enemy team blows up before you get near them. Those are the most boring games ever. The most fun games are always in the 45-55% range and have end results of 10;15/12:15 or even 14:15. Those are fun and exiting. 15:2 is boring as fuck and doesn’t even give you great XP because the damage spreads around because everybody gets one shot in because the enemy team sucks that much. Or you get roflstomped yourself so bad that you can’t even at least do decent damage in a loss because you fight 10:1 already before you can say “fuck my life”. That’s what players want? Sorry again.. big bullshit. Nbody wants that, not good players because they can hardly do anything in such games it’s over so quickly and certainly not bad players because they get killed in 10 seconds or see everybody die before they can even get a shot off. Those 15:2 matches are the ones everybody hates and the ones where the chat is full of gg!! messages are the close ones not the roflstomps. Are you telling me all the sports in the world have leagues so equal skilled people play against eachother because that’s less fun?? Are you insane? Do you honestly think sports would be more fun to watch and play if major league people would regularly get matched against total amateurs? Do you think the major league guys would have fun roflstomping those guys? Are you serious?? That’s the most stupid thing I ever read on this blog sorry. I developed games myself and this is a design idea I’ve never heard in the industry a single time and both as a former dev and a player I can just say it’s the most stupid idea I’ve ever heard. Sure, all gaming leagues and sports leagues in the entire world are doing it wrong, the WG way is the more fun way.. seriously, get real…
+1000 right there
PLEASE don’t create more corridor maps. getting more appealing maps for nubs who don’t know why they are spotted won’t solve anything but make people angry. They fucked up Malinovka for good. ok, Remove the fucking forest and put some bushes or something .. but fucking up the whole map?!
It takes some big balls to say the players don’t get it when it is obvious that SS and the developers certainly don’t get it. Some roflstomps are fine, problem is there are many times more roflstomps than there are good matches. And for every player who stays because he likes the roflstomps there is a player who quits because he is tired of being on a team with no hope and the only thing he accomplishes is stat padding the enemy.
I played 7 games yesterday. I played terrible, and won 5 of them. That was wrong so I quit for the night. There were 31k players on. A year ago it would have been double that number. For all your fine rationalizations, what WG is doing isn’t working and the game is bleeding players. Other than strongholds we have had no new content this year, and it is September and we got the first new tanks for 2014. I don’t know what WG is wasting their time on but they need to get their heads into the game so to speak
sometimes you get lucky, sometimes dont.
sometimes my ass, http://i.imgur.com/EFLgMUx.jpg
Quite agree with the article. In my opinion the constant demand and search for perfect balance is futile and unecessary in the context of WoT.
“But let’s get back to the “odds stacking” principle. Introducing skill MM would mean that victories with strong players on your side and tomatoes on the other would not happen, simply because both teams would always be roughly equal in skill. And no, that’s not a good thing.”
yes it IS a good thing. or it would be a good thing and you are just a noob wg representative…
2 maps that really need a rework are Mines and Prokhorovka.
Prokhorovka is simple to explain.
-Nobody can cross the mid ridges without getting shot to shit.
-Nobody can push the TD line without getting spotted and shot to shit. (like old magic forest)
-Nobody can poke over the hill without getting shot to shit.
It’s basically a camping map where you sit and cover waiting for arty shells or try to push and take shots in your flank as a reward.
Mines is terrible for high tier tanks, plus it’s completely imbalanced. The team that controls hill controls the game and unless they’re retarded will win the game. The “TD ridge spawn” has a huge advantage when it comes to taking the hill since they reach it faster and also have a safer route while the second spawn can get shot by the entire enemy team if they try to push up.
Then there are of course maps I simply dislike too, but these 2 are awful.
Hey! I liked El Halluf, BEFORE the center rework! It was peaceful. :) RIPOLDELHALLUF
RIPOLDMUROVANKA
At least you could snipe from one flank to another or rack up some nice spotting dmg. HOORAY FOR BRAWLFE… NOPE. Just fire the person responsible for this nighmare already wg.
Tell you what, people dont give a fuck about roflstomping the enemy, the reason why we love to do that is just because the game is too random in the first place. Sure I love to get 2k exp and top gun after getting fucked over by bad team composition or bad rng 10 times in a row, but that´s not me being happy about roflstomping, that´s me having at least something other than 10 terrible losses I couldnt make not happen. Anyone who´s not a utter shit player and noob just loves having fair 1-1 brawl or whatever, coming out as a winner by his pure skill.
First, thanks for the thoughtful post and for publicizing these type of conversations.
There is another aspect of the matchmaker that I think should be discussed. I agree with you (and the developers) that skill-based MM would not work. btw, what is “skill” in WoT anyway?
What I think the developers should explore is having matchmaker balance teams on one or two additional levels of “firepower”, for lack of a better term. Now MM uses the tank ‘battle tier’. Maybe adding a tank rating for DPM, and maybe stock/mid/full progress would help create more games that are determined by player skill and tactics.
I think it is entirely valid for players to complain that too many games are “wasters”, games that end up 15-2 where there is no ‘fun’ for players on either side. WoT developers should not dismiss such complaints and look for creative approaches that add ‘fun’ while preserving ‘sometimes up, sometimes down’.
“people LOVE to roflstomp the enemy team”
Damn SS, you were so close to the point and you missed it…
So, let’s say you’re typical Joe Average – on a corridor map you might be able to influence the outcome if you choose the right tank, BUT: if the other flank gets roflstomped or you chose a class that sucks in cqb IT’S NO FUN – you either get pwnd hard because you have absolutely no tactical options left except waiting for shots in the arse (hell, you can’t even give fire support to failing flank – new murovanka ffs! – and that’s why it’s now near impossible [from what I've seen] to turn the batle around) or don’t have any influence/die early on in the game. Result? More ragequits, since you tend to remember bad things more.
Hell, even I played wowp more than wot today, fv4202 be damned. At least there aren’t any fukkn corridors in the air…
Sorry SS but I think this post is bullshit. It is really not funny to be the only good player in a team full of tomatoes and having in front of you a team with most of their players at least greens. Having equal teams in skill would be fair. We are playing a skill based game, not the roulette in the casino. If they don’t want to balance by players, at least do it by teams. There is already too much RNG in the game now, which makes the competitive part of the game a joke but that is another story.
FFS people!!!
“Ladder” is already implemented in the game as Tiers.
WG already have some sort of statistic for ever player out there!
So, do you really thing it is so hard to make a “Ladder” based on every tier and possibly even for every role of a tank?
But no, Wargaming do not want that only because this kind of “Ladder” would actually show how unbalanced are certain tanks, or tank destroyers even within a tier!
They (WG) would need a major effort to completly rebalance all tanks only because of “Ladder”. And that is exctly why WG do not want a “skill based” MM!
i just read the first paragraph and want to say the author is a real condescending ASSHOLE with ur comment that EVEN skilled players r dumb asses and cant grasp something U find so basic. Just because someone is 48% doesnt mean they arent intelligent and understand tactics. some people are just poor clickers and some really play for fun and like bombing around in light tanks. i am 54%, but im not a good clicker and because of that im better at heavy tanks as u have more time to shoot and armor to help. i will now read the rest of the article, but u fucking pissed me off with the first paragraph, PRICK!
i read the rest of the article, and u just seem clueless. i think Steppes is a good maps for heavies. One side is for heavies and one side for meds and lights. i like this map in any tank. plus, heavies r good on most maps excep the new murovanka. thats a lt and mt map.
u also say northwest is a bad map for lights, WHAT? thats a good map for lights and meds. i hate that map in a heavy as the hills r so steep u cant climb them or flex at all.
u say the new elhalluf is defensive, my god ur clueless. elhalluf is the most aggressive stupid map in the game. u drive to the NW corner and brawl. i actually like the corner of corridors, but WG fucked the rest of the map so its now useless for all tanks and i RAGE like a maniac on chat trying to get all 15 tanks on my team to roll the NW corner. i have cursed more in chat on this map than any other, even lakeview valley noobs (im a liar!,lol ). if all 15 tanks go NW and u win the games over. if ur base is taken its easy to go back and defend. WG should put the middle back the way it was and keep the new NW corner.
i do agree that mtn pass jn a 100% brawl map.
WG could easily fix hidden village by removing big stupid mtn in west and put in a dessert with dunes lights and meds could play in and same with city, DUNES, or a prarie.
if i could choose longer ques for MM of equal tanks and between 45-55 XVM i would take it over games 60% and 40%. i love close games with equal skill. i hate blow out wins as i play heavies and dont get good cleanup. i RAGE over crushing losses even though i get good damage, usually, if i dont drown in disgust.
Sometimes up, sometimes down? And you think this is some fantastic epiphany you just had? There are those of us who have already considered how “fundamental” this is to WoT, yet still want skill based matchmaking. Not as a replacement for the random matches, but as an alternative. As a ladder system. Whatever. Just something.
Excusing the lack of will to develop it with “this is how the game works” is no more ingenious than just plain saying “we don’t like your idea and we don’t care about what you want”.
This is the first time I#ve to say: STFU SielentStalker. You’ve no idea of that game.
Sorry but lights tanks are so important on mountain pass. I think you dont understand whole tactics at this point.
No need to read rest of this article. WIll be still bullshit as you say, light tanks are useless on mountain pass.
JUST FOR YOUR KNOWLEGDE:
SCOUTS ON MOUNTAIN PASS ARE ONE OF TWO REASON YOU LOSE OR WIN. IF UR SCOUTS ARE RETARDED YOU’LL LOSE THIS MAP!!!!
Holy crap buddy..
you really lack reading comprehension, please re-read everything once again.
I agree with SS, some people only see the bad parts, and disregard the rest, no matter the outcome.
He is right actually, light tanks are completely vital on Mountain Pass for the South side, since they can cross the shooting gallery along the southern pass and prevent enemy scouts on the other side from getting into the bushes and spotting the crossing units and therefor enabling them all to be massacred.
His tone however, is a bit too strong.
Your post about corridor maps and this “skilled MM” are great, SS!
U must be his brother.
I love the fact some people just gotta toss insults here and there, hoping their own little voices would be heard, on a place that the devs themselves would never look at…
oh and best of all, those people calling SS in a condescending manner and the like, fuck you!!
SS has proven many many times how much he dislikes WG’s attitude and politics, if you have been reading that long then you sure as fuck know, yet as soon as he posts something that is “outside the box” (thinking is hard) you all get your dongs contracted, twisted and whatnot.
well, i rather drink a dead porcupine’s piss instead of hearing your yadda’s, SS made a point, up to you if you wanna brainstorm it, takes someone with at least a neurone to know that not everything is absolute, you stupid e-lawyers, im sure you can see the “big picture” whereas the ones with all the data and numbers and statistics are blind as beavers — i dont buy it. I RATHER TRUST THEM than the piss-poor whiners here
UR full of shit.
U trust a company whose sole purpose is MAKING MONEY. U trust a company not to screw up a good thing? Just because WG started out good, they can’t go bad. Have you heard of YAHOO or AOL? They both had a really good thing and SCREWED IT UP. Look at how WG is now treating players. WG used to give out tanks left and right, but now that they are rolling in money and players they have changed, WG has become very ARROGANT, they know everything, players are dumb, WG is smart, and now WG no longer gives out tanks such as the KV1S or T37 like they did in the past but made us buy them. The big difference with WG as apposed to YAHOO or AOL is that WG does not have any competition. WG knows we like the game and will continue to play so they can treat us like shit.
As to your comments about SS, I have always enjoyed reading FYR until SS decided he was so much smarter than everybody else and he knows the game so much better. It the TONE of both of these articles that pissed me off more than anything else. He is extremely CONDESCENDING. He wrote these articles like he is right and if you disagree with him UR a moron especially if your a below average payer. According to SS, ALL below average players are MORONS and can’t grasp tactical game play.
“he wrote the articles like he is right”
reading comprehension is hard mate…
he asked people to be open minded, to listen to an opinion, to actually et out of their box-world, but you clearly failed at it
“According to SS, ALL below average players are MORONS and can’t grasp tactical game play.”
isnt that what every damn player says this days? “everybody is a tomato but me! i swear!”
you re just full of it, you will always be right, no room for anything but your god damned opinion, what a waste to even write, thankfully there are smarter people out there who can see the bigger picture, and not some whiney e-lawyer
TL;DR: Inconsistent fairness = more fun. Frankly, I don’t believe this. People *always* notice/remember negative events more than positive events, so easy wins are much less psychologically important than destined losses.
Do you ever hear someone proclaiming publicly that they’ll keep playing WoT because they’ve stomped a few teams, compared to the volume of people that say they’ll quit because of bad losses (because of ‘bad teams’, ‘sky cancer’, etc.)?
If teams are matched, it becomes harder to argue that you lost because of something besides your lack of skill, which is something a player can improve (and hopefully be rewarded by). Similarly, a player can be more assured that they carried their weight with every win.
That being said, skill matched teams would still be ‘entertainingly unfair’ on an individual basis because of tier spread; i.e. you still get opportunities to be top tier. Tier spread is quite acceptable, because tiers are already team matched so no team gets an advantage in this regard.
Really, WG has already done all of a team matching programme so far, but they forgot to match skill.
I dont believe that corridors/no corridors and skillbased MM are necessary for feeling satisfaction in wot. You see there are players who quit before the game starts because they know the match will be “hard”. Lets say they play tier 8 tank and enemy has unicum tier 10 players. People forget that unicums have tracks that break down also. People forget they have same amount of hp. Many lowtier tanks have good dpm if they have a chance to fire away into enemy weakspots. Its just a matter of attitude. If you give up because it will be hard then maybe you should question your own attitude. Yesterday I played with tier 7 scout and was matched fairly often against tier 10. Still I was able to get good xp in a few games because I never gave up anything against the enemy. Its true it is harder, but not impossible. And you never know how the game goes if you dont even try your best. People often come up with excuses rather than thinking of possibilities how they can do this and that to annoy the enemy/support teammates. I’ve seen “bad” players do amazing things and good players do very stupid things. Every player has the same tanks, same rng, same server and same everything. Good stats are only an indicator of how often given player makes the right choices. And you can already play platoons with tier 10 heavies, company, stronghold, team battles, CW, numerous e-sports events. I guarantee you will face good teams in there if thats what you are after.
What comes to corridors, why are they a problem? Thats usually where every player can purely show their awareness in the battle and with a good timing and teamwork it should be easy to win fights. I understood that mostly good players whine about corridors: “they are made for noobs”?. Well if its pure tank vs tank action then shouldnt it be easy to stomp the enemy if you are better? I dont see the problem. There are a lot of those “good” players that camp and snipe whole game and run away from every fight and wont take any hits even if it was necessary sacrifice in order to win. In this case I also think people should just look into a mirror. Its 15vs15.
all pretty scientific backed up,but pls answer me a question:If every map favors a specific classes,which maps DONT FAVOR heavy tanks?
City maps?definetly not.
open maps?still far from being useless,good guns,big alphas,armor is armor,specially when not too many artys in game,and with those corridors,all heavy should be pretty safe.
corridors?yeah,gimme more of those.
City dont favor TDs?Really?try to play vs couple of deathstars or JpzE100s blocking a path when theyre backed up.
now lets look at the average joe player.
A n**b*cough cough*average player can do well in a heavy and he can do well in a TD.
can he do well in a light or medium?I doubt it.
can he do well in a light tank?nooooo.-no-no.
So,what is WG doing?
for me,they are screwing around with maps to make them less demanding (as you wrote)for noobs,and more demanding to better players playing more demanding classes.
Armor is gonna forgive some noobs mistakes,and big alpha on TDs also (fearfactor).
is that wrong?not totally,but in the end,when every good player realizes that his WR or survive ratio in a LT is far behind his overall average,hes gonna stop play that particular class anymore.
Ive seen plenty of ”OP” RU 251s driven by very good players die very quick,even in open maps.Cuz LTs are allways LTs…no matter what,this game does not give a f*ck about LTs anymore.Noobs dont play LTs after all,so its all fine,we keep 70-80% of our customers satisfied,no need to watch out for incoming fire from a distance anymore,no worries about beeing spoted too early,some hill or corridor allways there to provide help………
I find your argumentation (and WG’s) questionable, to say the least.
RNG levels itself out over a larger number of samples, so its effect can only be viewed short time. Now RNG causes more grief than joy, because frustration is experienced much more intensely than success. RNG also makes it harder to understand why you fail or why you succeed because it distorts the feedback you are getting from your actions, making it harder for new and/or bad players to improve.
Only taking a player’s global performance in account for a skill based MM is the wrong approach. You need to look at a player’s performance with the vehicle he is chosing for the battle he is about to enter; Preferrably during the last X battles or Y days, and not for the entire time he owns that vehicle, and only fall back to a global rating (or a similar vehicle he owns for a longer period of time), if he only owns that vehicle for a short time.
The main effect of RNG based MM I see is that it tends to give the good and great players an edge because they often will see teams that are inferior due to not having equally skilled players, so they can dominate such a match. The reason simply is that there are so few players at that level that RNG based MM will often put more of them in one team than the other (or some in one and none in the other). That’s why win rate currently is an indicator of player skill. This also is where the good players’ ePeen whine and rant would start if it was taken away from them.
This implies that you do not have a rank or league based MM, where players would form pools determined by their skill and only players from the same skill range would be matched against each other. That’s route which I do believe should not be taken.
If you had a skill based MM, the good players would presumably usually last the longest and would probably have very balanced (and therefore imo thrilling battles). The bad players would be wed out soon. Still I believe the learning effect for them would be bigger, since they can watch how good players do it. As outlined above, the positive effect would be even bigger if general RNG (aim, penetration and damage spread) would be reduced.
The devs need to cut the crap with their constant claims that WoT is a “daddies” game. All you have to do is look at the weekend and monthly missions to realize this game is designed to reward tankers who play for hours a day. I am a typical “daddy” who buys premium time and spends gold on shells, crew training and free XP. I don’t have time to compete the weekend missions let alone the monthly ones, when I get maybe 4 or 5 hours a week to play (and that is a good week). If WoT really cared about “daddies” they would make premium accounts a better deal — i.e. give us ability to retrain crew primary skills (driver, radioman, etc) and maintain crew skill memory (tank to tank) so we don’t need to train as many crews.
“constant claims?” they ve only said it two times over the course of 3 and half years….
and your idea of premium benefits its a bad business model for profit.
because motivating players to want to play good is so wrong isn’t it?!!? Goodluck motivating someone who sees constantly 40% chance to win , 28% chance to win, 32% chance to win. who carry game making 4-5 kills each game for nothing to end up losing even after killing 9 for example?!? that’s fun!?! Expect full rush and fast suicide from players who simply have enough of this MM bullshit!!! You just go fullspeed ahead and do as much damage as you can in as little time as possible and you still get middle of table XP so yeah, Skill MM, who needs it right?!? goodluck with that . hardcore gamers will move to WT eventually and they won’t even care if they’re missed or not in wot.
While I agree with some aspects of the article, I completely disagree with the “equal skill team MM” part. That’s what would make the game perfect for me. Lets see why, in my opinion:
1. Completely obliterating the enemy team is absolutely no fun at all. If you are in a slow tank/TD you have a big chance to make 0 damage. Being on the other side and seeing stuff like 1-7 after 2 minutes in the game is also a fun killer.
2. Having an unicum in the team does not guarantee victory nor is losing the unicum a guarantee defeat. I would take a 2x green platoon over a purple unicum every day. The article is saying the unicums may have a tough life if this type of MM is implemented. I say good. Many unicums are inflated by playing a lot of platoons and shooting a LOT of gold.
3. It does not have to be equal colors on both teams, meaning that a unicum and a yellow in a team could have 2 greens on the other side. This would be interesting to see for me. Who wins, 7 unicums aided by 8 yellows or 15 greens?
4. My final idea is this: make EU3 with “equal skill team MM” and leave EU1 and 2 alone. This way EVERYBODY wins.
Let’s see:
Redshire – modified – corridors added, making the map more heavy friendly.. To bad that now too many heavy gather in the same spot they don’t move arty makes a mess out of them cuz they don’t use cover. OUTCRY; omg nerf arty!
El Halluf:: – modified like 4-5 times, corridors added, THERE is no place where you can hide with a tank on that map from a good arty. Blive me we tried in clanwars, good arty positioning it’s going to ruin your day. The secret is to know from where arty is shooting and cover accordingly.. but if they have 2 or more arty covering all sides.. you’re fucked.
outcry: NERF ARTY!
Malinovka – modified – corridors added. can’t tell much about it because i didn’t test it much, but i’ve got a run with a light on it.
Karkov map added – maze like map.
Serene Coast – modified – corridors added. I guess they fucked ep on this one bcause they actually improved the map.
Now why is the points on adding more light tanks and try to engage people to play with light tanks if you modify all maps with corridors? Light tanks can’t be used properly on corridor maps.
And all the idiots cry because they got hit by arty.
Skill MM only serve as a better sampling for balancing tank but not what make WoT successful. It is a arcade type of game that is easy to pick up and mastering it are mostly depended on your playing skillz as a player, mostly the time investment.
“Dumbing down” is not a good way to reward those who invested time into it. And the uncertainly would led to the loss of money invested because money doesn’t give you the freedom to drive whatever tank you like (APSD/HEAT), but force you to use one or two lines of tanks.
While “Dumbing down” may get you access to wider audience, but WoT already have a wide audience; what it needs is one: better gold sink (fortress) ; two: more encouraging low tier game play and three: elements to keep their sugar daddies.