How come you seem to get worse teams after you won a battles?

Hello All,

It has been discussed before, but in seperate threads. After we win a couple of battles, we always get worse teams and we start losing. Those streaks as always. Nobody has ever explained it properly, but I do find it odd. Here is one of these examples https://replay.battlebay.net/GKVZQTCZ#JFTKLVCF

And then there are people who say ' the game will make you lose, so you always end up with 50% win rate or thereabouts'. If this were true, then nobody could get past 0 Infmay. But I don't get these streaks either. So, what is true and what is not?

I sure hope the overal score is divided by 50% team effort and 50%- personal effort.


Regards,
Flint

 

I think we've all had the idea of matches being fixed, or at least balanced against us, seemingly to maintain a 50/50 ratio? I've had many lonely drunken nights with too much free time thinking along those lines and we've all heard it at one point or another, usually a rant by someone who's frustrated at being stuck in a rut that feels like the game itself is keeping you in lol I'm 99% sure it's in our heads lol
Because realistically think what it would mean? if some of your matches are fixed and have odds stacked against you in order to make ya lose and maintain a 50/50 ratio?
If matches are fixed to make you lose, It would mean all, or at least many of your winning matches are fixed too! As "we're all being kept at 50/50" so when you win its cos the game is screwing some one else every game is fixed?
Lol the idea fixed matches can't be real lol it's just the imagination of some paranoid disgruntled player whose been stuck in master league too long lol it may feel that way some times but even if there's evidence I'm gonna stick my head in the sand, block my ears and shout lalalalala
We're the masters of our own fate on the bay and not at the whims of some algorithm that decides when we wins or lose

Sorry drunk and too much time again lol

 

this is weird for me too, it's weird that everyone can increase his infamy if:

• it would be logical to have players with very low/0 infamy after some time, NM pool is increasing each season so even more infamy is "destroyed" at end of each season, yet still there is probably no increase of very low infamy players or am I missing something? is low infamy players/begginers destiny to always stay at low infamy without any chance of getting higher?
• how much infamy is "destroyed" at end of each season and how much infamy is "generated" by battles against bots? I doubt that there are (or will be soon) enough new players every season to generate enough infamy? or is totall infamy (of the whole player base) slowly decreasing
• if we had 50% win rate than no one would ever had more than 0 infamy, yet like 99% of players have more than 0 infamy

 

Miika said this (a while ago):

 

I don't say it is fixed, but that is what a lot of us think and they come up with the 50% rule, but that would be impossible to gain Infamy. That said others can hold you back, I have had 10 battles in a row, where 8 of them I was the one who did the most damage. But if the others do combined twice less than you, then no matter how good you are, you aren't going to win and gain Infamy.

You are always at the merci of others, which makes it hard. Because so many people just don't work together.

 

Unless match making is fixed to give every one 50% wins to maintain larger market for the ad revenue? I mean who's gonna watch ads for low rewards from losing matches? If Only the good players (small percentage of us.... Ok small percentage of you) win and have rewards worth the time to watch ads they'd miss out on so much ad revenue

 

in reality with 50% win rate you will gain infamy

Spoiler: spoiler

I realised that after I read Miika's comment in one of the older threads

Spoiler: TL;DR variant of the text below

when one team wins, the other loses so it's 50% win rate, when it's draw it's for both teams but draws are so rare that they're not affecting the win rate that much (and if we really have 50% win rate "guaranteed" then loses and draws are the rest of the battles so you WILL gain infamy because draws are rare but still present so the remaining 50% are not only losses)

and you know why? because the left 50% are NOT only loses, these are also draws-yes you will gain or lose infamy (but only ±1) so in reality you have more wins than loses
of course the other thing is whether the matches are rigged or not-imho they are not, or at least not how people think
ovarall win rate must be around 50% when you eliminate draws or it should be very close because chance of draw (when you decide win/loss by simply generating kills on both sides

Spoiler: why randomly generated kills?

it doesn't work like that in BB but it's the easiest way for me to calculate the chance of having draw as result of battle, in reality the chance of having draw as result is impossible to calculate due to human factor instead of pure % chances of hitting enemy, evading shots etc.

)
when using (and I will stay at this because it's impossible for me to implement things like time etc.) randomly generated kills it's:
first number can be 1-5 (number of kills)
let's say that you get 2
then the second number MUST be 2
that chance 20% chance (getting one desired number from all the possible numbers is 1÷5)
and here it becomes interesting:

1. so you have 20% chance for draw (lol, in reality it's much, much lower) and win and loss have equal chances-40% both of them, in this case you have 0 infamy gain because draws with +1 are negated by draws with -1 and wins are negated by losses
2. you have 50% win rate guaranteed, 20% draw rate so you have only 30% loss rate (or you might also make it that you have 20% from the 50% left after stating that you have 50% wins guaranteed, then you would have 80% from the non-wins), so you ignore draws because they should have 0 infamy gain/loss (theoretically) and you have more wins than loses so you should gain infamy because you gain infamy 20% of the time (30% loss rate negate 3/5 of the win rate so you have 2/5 left)

but no of these two variants is true in BB but the second one is closer to the reality

 

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate,
I am the captain of my soul.

One stanze of "Invictus" by William Ernest Henry.

 

But that does not explain these streaks. When I win 8 battles, I will lose the same or often even more. I have had 25 - 30 losses with only 2 wins onces. But I had never had 25 - 30 wins and only 2 losses. I hear more people who lose 30 battles in a row, but I don't know anyone who wins 30 in a row (expect fot the Seal Clubbers in the Events of course, they are rewarded for their behaviour instead of being punished)

So, I wonder do we get stronger opponents after we had a winning streak? Some say 'yes', but most have the same Infamy. So, it does not seem obvious.

Regards,
Flint

 

I tried to explain the win rate part
the "stronger opponents after every win" is unexplainable by normal players because we don't see the stats (average win streaks and loss streaks etc.) and the game code (if there is something like magical line/s of code that will find you stronger opponents after every win or something like that) so we can't say if this is true or not because these are only our subjective feelings, not facts

 

Very true! I wish they would show as some more stats, as they have done in some cases. I don't know kf there is indeed some magic code to give us stronger opponents, although many people think there is if you follow the in gamge chat rooms.

Some are certain tht the 50/50 rule keeps them from gaining Infamy ans that there are even bots in the game, which are almost impossible to beat. I have heard it all!

 

I know some of these better players and am very impressed. Two of them have been nr 1 of my country several times.

I don't get these streaks, but maybe there is a simple explaination to it all. Lets say you gain 500 Infamy in a day, of course you get stronger opponents. But maybe these people have been at that level for 3 months or came down from 500 Infamy up. So, these might be stronger than you as a newbie to that Infamy level.

It is just a thought.

 

Streaks appear more common because they inherently involve more games. For example, if you win four games in a row, then you hover at the same infamy, losing one then winning one for four games, then you lose four in a row: to your brain, it looks like two thirds of your games have been streaks, but actually you’ve only had 2 long streaks, and 4 streaks that were only a single game long. So they’re actually far less common than you think.

This subject has come up before in another topic, so I decided to do a little analysis to see how common my own streaks were. I’ll quote the results here...

 

In my guild it happens with just normal battles that people will lose 30 battles in a row. Lets assume we are not that good, how are the odds that 30 times in a row the rest is as bad as us?

And still it happens every month with at least one player. I have had it before, 30 losses and 2 or 3 wins. I had such bad teams, that winning was impossible. Where 4 mks did not even 2000 dmg combined.

 

With my mk2 with weapons which range from 200 tot 270 damage I beat teams with all epic. But got slaughter with my mk5 by mk2s myself. Some battles at 500 Infamy were so much harder than at 1300 Infamy and the players so much better. Or they were just lucky, but you get the picture.

 

I’ve noticed that sometimes there are subtle things I do which seem to kill my whole team, but they’re not always the things you expect.

One example ‘might be’ starting next to the capture zone on Wayward, and rushing the capture. Then 3-4 unfriends come to ‘stop capture’ (your own team is less likely to come assist with capture). And now, even if I run away without taking any damage... I’ve created a situation where the unfriends are all ‘together’ and working together, while my own team are divided, doing their own thing. And the whole battle quickly falls apart.

I’ve had a similar thing happen on Crash and Burn, where I’ll rush out onto the capture zone to try to bait the unfriends, and then for some reason, my team’s Fixer will follow me out and try to support. Then (of course) all the unfriends turn up shooting. I try to run away (which was my plan all along), but the Fixer is now exposed and can’t escape. You could argue it’s the Fixer’s fault (which it kind of is), but I also understand that everyone was reacting to something I did, and it ultimately created a situation that was bad.

I’ve had other games where the opposite happens. I’ll move in way that confuses the unfriends, or make a move that unifies my team.

My point is, winning is not just about you getting ‘top damage’. If the rest of my team is confused and divided, then they’ll usually all do terrible damage. Not because they are bad players, but because they’re not finding the support they need. In those situations I’ll often get top damage by default, but that doesn’t mean I played well, or deserved to win (it might be all my fault).

You need to be conscious of what your team is doing, who is following you, who is going off on their own, who is protecting your flank. Keep an eye on the map, and look at who starts the game with Torpedos on top and who starts with a Flare (that will clue you into how they plan to move).

You need to be present in games, and make people react to you (including your own team). Support your teammates, hold the line, unbalance the unfriends. It’s not just about your own personal damage score.

I’m not saying that I always know how to do that (I definitely don’t). But at least I understand it’s important, and appreciate that how I move affects how others move.

If you keep losing and getting ‘bad teams’, please take a look at what you’re doing, and make sure you’re not making the same mistakes over and over.