Pixonic Insiders!

They are fixed...

Some good info here on MM. looks very much like low bot levels either don't work or penalize you. My 3/6 light and 2/5-6 med hangar faced tier 7 and more heavies.

Win - but I was not relevant:

Blue team:

Wow, you were definitely low man on the forum pole there. Most of those bots were centered around a reasonable point and overall not too far off. You must have a good Elo established and most of the higher buys must have not set theirs yet.

Also, I think that weapon levels are now weighted more than Bot levels, so low Bot high weapon is no longer advantageous. A balanced Bot/weapon hanger is likely more beneficial.

Thanks for posting.

Rant all you want, compared to some other f2p games I played I'm very happy with the way Pix runs things. Room for improvement, sure, and everybody would like to see some things implemented or implemented faster than they will be, but I don't see major issues here. And you'll need only a reasonable, small cash investment or you can even play completely free.

Hmm, I would say that recognizing your limits in that situation, adjusting, and still managing to find a way to impact the game IS relevant!  Don't sell yourself short! 

And yeah a lot of iOS folk are saying that about leveling out weapons and bots to the same number.  The only problem with making too many changes is that the system is still trying to figure out what to do with you, and if you change it, it could prolong the period of instability before it knows what to do with you.  It can take anywhere fromn 20 to 50 to maybe more matches to get settled. 

By the same token, upgrading bots (unless it is a WSP or Au bot) are the easiest thing to fix if they don't end up needing to be leveled.  Ag bots are fairly cheap and if you are as early in the game as you say, it isn't that big of an issue to buy new ones and starting over just the bot levels.

And again, you showed your relevance by bringing an unarmored tricycle with a bb-gun to a tank fight, and still making good damage. 

OK I posted this in another thread but I think it fits better here.

The reality may be that the better matched teams can be frustrating to experienced players with good win rates.

1. Old MM, you balance a hangar like 2/6 Geps with 2/6 Cossack and maybe a 1/4 medium or two. You face similar equipment for the most part, and if you are good your superior skill means that YOU are the key to winning or losing the game. Very high win rates are possible because effectively team net skill levels combined with hangar optimization and using OP weapons (tri-mag geps 2/10 for example) means that one good player can massively increase the chances of winning for his team.

2. New MM, your higher tier weapons bump you up and your high win rate bumps you up. New MM does a better job of balancing the net skill of both teams for closer battles BUT - as a good player the net effect you can have on the battle is MIUCH LOWER. It's not all down to you anymore. Your 3/9 Geps are now matched with 9/8 heavies which splash you into a grease stain if they look at you. You can still contribute, you can still improve the chances that your team wins, but your net effect on the team's chances to win is lower. This means that as a good player your win rate WILL GO DOWN. That probably won't feel good.

For the long term health of the game and the community this HAD TO HAPPEN. It still feels bad as the good player used to running 80% + but the old way is not sustainable. I joined the game and within about 5 days had figured out (with the help of this community and getting smashed by clubbers) that the way to win was to buy me three Gepards and load them up with Aphids, Magnums, and Pinatas. I had a Cossack that I pretty quickly got a Taran for and by week 2 I was running 85% win rate. Mostly smashing clueless new players into goo with my over-leveled weapons. That friends is a problem. How many potential new players were driven away after getting smashed 3 times in a row by Gep clubbers? When it happened to me I just looked at their hangers and then went and got what they smashed me with, but I'm betting most casual players just felt it was unfair and quit.

The adjustment is going to be hard for the tiny minority of us who are used to winning 70%+. A good balanced MM and game, especially if it takes skill into account, is going move everyone closer to 50%. I come from World of Tanks Blitz - it's much more balanced and you can't club in the same way, and a 60%+ winrate is extremely rare. Less than 2% of the players hit that. The reality may be that only a tiny % of players will crack 60% War Robots with this new MM, and the adjustment might be difficult but for the long term health of the game it's important.

Lephturn

To ask something actually related to the thread:

Pixonic made these *self-censored* changes and ambushed half the player base with them. Things are in disarray and many (non-seal clubbers) among us are pretty much ready to either leave or stop committing to this game financially any further until Pix makes it clear what their intentions are (because maybe it's fun for you guys but getting clubbed 8/10 and winning 2/10 thanks purely to random HG team mates isn't all that jolly when you're barely a Silver player).

Wouldn't it be possible for the people on these Forums who talk to Pixonic to contact them and ask them what their plans are, insofar as they are able to share them? To get some sort of info out of them at least regarding whether they intend to keep this MM system, build on it, roll it back or something else entirely?

lephturn I also have had to sort of 'recalibrate success,' since I'm not topping the charts on numbers and can be up against outsize competition. Last night in SF, I tied up a VTSC 'clubber' (if that term still has any relevance) for a bit in center beacon, and was delighted to take him down. Reds took a fair bit of time dislodging the Boa from center that they could have used elsewhere, and it did help keep them spread out. The rest of the Blues did the real heavy lifting and we won the match, but I felt pretty good about things in a non-statistical way.

Muhlakai I'm also curious to see how Yamantau is handled.

... which is exactly what it is. Along with Springfield. Try taking a light and running those two maps. It takes about a shot, a shot and a half and you'd be lucky to cap even two beacons with as many bots or more.

Here is my hangar from that game. I'll run this for a bit, maybe try 6/5 lights but upgrades will take days.

Interesting, a half dozen games later I'm still being out-matched by eons.

BUT. The teams are not badly balanced it seems. I've won more than I lost, even got 5 Au twice for capping. Imthink I'll switch the Cossacks to ECUs and just beacon run for a couple of days and see if it adjusts.

There could be something else at play. What if being level 30 automatically puts you to a certain level in MM?

Sadly, the communication is mostly one-way.

At the silver level, Android is fine the way it is at the moment. The changes to mech health that came with 2.5 have done much to address balance issues. I put one of my two Geps in long term storage in favor of having more muscle in my lineup - prior to 2.5, that would've been a very poor decision... now it seems quite reasonable.