Реклама | Adv
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
  • Rotator
Сообщения форума
Реклама | Adv

Why do Some Argue Against Skill Based MM?

Дата: 28.07.2021 03:23:04
View PostLT_Moon, on Jul 27 2021 - 16:17, said: Measuring skills is one of the trickiest things in the human world. How will you define the skill in WoT? Which indicators will you use? Where is the evidence that the indicators you picked are indeed valid indicators of "skills"? Also, human performance is dynamic, which requires a long-term measure. Then how long do you need to observe a player's performance? "Skills" assume individual differences. Then for a game company, will they want to keep only elite players, which are a necessarily minority? If the game puts players in different skill tiers, will players in lower skill tiers stay in the game?   It is easy to say to have a skill-based MM but almost impossible to make it work. Also, the game company needs to keep a larger player base. That's my answer from a bit academic point of view.   Practically, limiting access to higher-tier games based on the number of games played would be better. The game cannot punish players with lower skills even after playing the game for a while. But, requiring some experience in lower-level games will populate the lower-tier games and prepare players for higher-tier games. I believe very few would oppose to the concept of skilled MM itself but to how it can be done.

DeviouslyCursed:  Win Rate per tank is one of the most accurate statistics in the game. Period. Tanks and tiers aren't equal, that is why when looking at the overall Win Rate, what tanks they played to get that Win Rate is extremely important. If you could sort out platoons, then there would be no reason to ever consider anything else. Limiting higher tiers to "better" players is stupid. What happens when only 55%+ players are playing at tier 10. 50% of them still lose. Guess what happens to their Win Rate. Yes, the same thing will happen to all their stats. You can't have 30 players in each match doing more than their tank's HP in damage. People making this suggestion simply aren't thinking it through. Or are possibly incapable of it. That might seem harsh but this is ridiculously easy to see the issues with this type of restriction. 

View PostMojo_Riesing, on Jul 27 2021 - 16:44, said:   Sure, i see what you are saying. Ok fine, prevent by artificial means "lower skill" players from contaminating the "higher skill" Tiers (not that this was ever prevented at all, but for sake of argument let's say it was).  To my mind, that right there IS a form of "skill based" match-making, at least for those unspecified higher Tiers.  I don't know how you compensate all the players who spent real world cash to play at those soon to be exclusive levels but set that aside for the moment.  I'll tell you right now if they "exclusionary" zone starts at Tier VIII you will see severe problems for Wargaming even litigation.   So, say your idea would work and if so, just to keep it even, EXCLUDE the "higher skill" players from any lower Tier play.  I have a feeling that would be just as unpopular and both unworkable and litigious as your suggestion (made by others as well) but what the heck what's another unworkable concept added to an equally unworkable concept?

 

DeviouslyCursed:  Taking time and battles to reach the higher tiers is effectively the restriction. The fact that some people can't or won't learn is not WG's fault. Nor can they do anything about it. At least not if the game was to be successful. As fun as EverQuest and Ultima Online were because of their brutal difficulty and severe punishing of mistakes, companies figured out pretty quick you got more players if you made it so everyone could reach end game content. And yes Mojo has it right: changing WoT to that now isn't possible, even if it was a good idea (it's not though).

Реклама | Adv