Poll: Broken Matchmaking

I agree with you. That issue is still present even at Ace 2 and Ace 1. I'm sure it'll be the same story when I reach Nightmare.

 

This is exactly what I've been proposing. Seems to work with other multiplayer games. Infamy, ship tier, weapons, gear, total dmg, etc should all be considered into the algorithm. World of Warships has excellent matchmaking compared to BB, proof it can be done differently. I'm not buying the excuse that it can only be done one way.

 

I'm not. I'm against that change because it's not an improvement. Putting equal mk levels on both sides does not make anything more fair.

 

For this to be a real argument we would need to agree on whether its an improvement or not.
I think matchmaking works ok, being a compromise between short queue and almost all matches being winable.

I'm all for improvements, but I do hope they focus on improving larger concerns than mk4 vs mk5 boats. The most fun would be larger fleets, but that also comes at the expense of queuetime (but at least you can then decide if you are willing to wait or not).

 

I think it's fine as it is. Sometimes it feels scary to meet an all out mk5 team with only mk4s, but they are still winnable - those guys are low infamy for a reason.
I find incompatible load outs / builds or strategies to be a bigger loss-factor than uneven level of ships.
And, over the course of many matches things even out, sometimes you're slightly ahead, sometimes you're behind (goes for other problems like floaters as well).

 

I would love this personally. It wouldn't be perfect but anythings better than the 50% W/L system

 

Well shit... Nevermind then lol

 

Thanks for replying. Yes, I know how WoWS matchmaking works considering I used to play it quite often. I appreciate your input, however, the quoted sentence alone tells me you've probably never played WoWS before. I get your point, but I cannot agree with you considering your lack of experience with WoWS. Googling the wiki's matchmaking does not tell you that WoWS has captain skills which literally operate and upgrade the same way BB's crew talents work. The matchmaking wiki will also not inform you of other factors that are comparable to BB's, which you would have known had you played it. WoWS also has weapon and ship parts to upgrade, comparable to an extent to BB's weapons and gears. It has leagues which is similar to infamy leagues in BB. It also has a paint job system that is not only cosmetic, but actually give slight changes in stats, hey kind of like perks in BB. It has a flag system which works similar to paintjobs that effects both performace and rewards, another similarity of perks from BB again! There have been restriction patches in WoWS over time which they admitted were broken and fixed through a patch regarding uneven amount of carriers, similar to the complaints you keep getting in BB about uneven amount of fixers per team. The matchmaking in WoWS is much more complicated than simply ship tier. It calculates all the ship performance factors which are found at the bottom of the wiki (survivability, artillery, AA, maneuverability, concealment, torpedoes, aircraft). Considering all that goes into the algorithm makes its matchmaking system much more superior compared to BB's, and that's not even counting the restrictions they added over time, like the carrier/fixer example I told you about. WoWS matchmaking truly let's a player's skill shine freely. With all that said, I just feel like you guys might be stuck and fixated on a particular system of matchmaking. I hope you guys at the very least consider restriction patches like WoWS did with their game over time. I enjoy BB alot, but I can't help imagine how much more I would enjoy it if its matchmaking can be improved. I highly recommend your staff play WoWS because I think you guys could learn a lot from it, and potentially even decide to use elements that work and perhaps transfer them in some form into BB. At the end of the day, World of Warships is an eSport game and Battle Bay is not. The day BB gets on the level of WoWS on the eSport stage might be the day your matchmaking decisons may have more weight to them.

 

I don't mind losing but when I lose I prefer it to be against harder enemies rather than with handicapped teammates. I don't want to be last player at 4:00 left to game so maybe less infamy rewards for lower performers but still 50% wins for them.

I lose but perform well: Maybe I could lose 2 or 3 less infamy than the others. If I noticeably carry a team maybe I could win 2 or 3 extra infamy. And vice versa. Not much but it would add up of I keep performing well. Then lower my infamy rewards once I reach the infamy level I can't perform well in until I improve or get better items.

 

Hmm that's true. Matchmaking is very tricky lol. I can see why it seems so out of our favors.

 

My one suggestion for better matchmaking would be to get rid of the nightmare reset to 4000 --- If anything creates inbalance its monsters like Christmas & S fleeting when they are both around 4k infamy each. I got lucky at the start of last season and ended up on their team 7 times in a row for essentially 7 free wins, was nice but also a tad silly!
But I suppose the system remains because you want to keep a mechanism in that removes infamy from the total pool?

 

My only balancing issue, and perhaps unsolvable because of the small number of players above 3k, is the infamy disparity you face in some matches between players; sometimes it can be 1k or more just between player 1 and 2. When you get the short end of that stick multiple times in a row, it removes quite a bit of the fun. I have no issue with how infamy accumulates or basing matchmaking on it. But I wish MM could operate within a tighter band or prevent repetitive queues with that kind of disparity. Do I really need to be fodder for the same infamy goliaths over and over again? Those beatdowns are pointless.

 

I also played world of tanks for some years and can say their matchmaking is horrible. In battle bay when you are going against ships with higher mk you can at least hit them and damage them. In wot, if you go against a tank one tier above you, it is almost impossible to do damage to it. That is completely unfair since they can 2-3 shot your tank while you can shoot them 10 times and only one shot penetrated. This is not a problem in battle bay, I like this matchmaking because going against those higher mk ships makes me think that they can easily be beaten with good teamwork. All you need to get higher in infamy is just to keep playing and have your team in consideration in your play style. This is why I don't think the matchmaking is broken, you can progress you just need to spend time in the game.

 

I love WOT just because of the gameplay. But agreed on MM. That game is a pay for win rate system where you can buy better perks and ammo to improve win performance. NO THANKS!

If we ever get some form of organized guild war system in the game, perhaps this can allow for another outlet to progress a guild's battle performance based on teamwork, boats/items/captains (aka money and time), and skill. Winrate is more suitable for that guild-based scenario. Just a little issue of a larger player base and coding...hehe.

 

I loved the game too, spent two years playing it and had several tier 9 tanks and was so close to the e-100 but I quit because of matchmaking and because it was pay to win with its premium ammo.