The Economics of Infamy

Very simple, a carrier doing its job somewhere

 

Nice try, but I got there without fleeting.

 

A carrier does not have to fleet-up to carry others...

 

In this context what is more importantly, player satisfaction (that generates income for your company) or being right (which only boosts ego)?

 

I can vouch for Miathan. He's really good. Number one in his country, in fact. He knows where he's needed most and is always there when you head him. It's actually mostly skill. It doesn't much the rarity, as it's no use if none of the shots hit. Oh yeah, he's also only mk5

 

It wasn't meant as an attack or to devaluate his/her efforts, it was a side amusing moment...
In fact i would be unable to properly explain or answer his/her question in a proper way as i myself have not reached that level of mk,items or skills

 

If a "carrier" is not fleeted, he'll be against me as often as on my team, and the average infamy I gain due to this "carrier" would be 0.

 

You're correct even politicians are unable to make everyone happy...
But there is difference between everyone and majority, at least politicians have made that understanding into a profession...

 

Then why answer in a way that could be interpreted as demeaning?

 

If we would be talking about a single carrier, you could be correct, but we're not right?

 

With short answers one should always follow the conversation? It's obvious i started non-seriously with that side conversation...

 

How does this matter? If there are more "carriers" (still not sure what you're even talking about exactly), they'd all be opposing me as often as on my team (slightly more often, actually, since there are 5 enemies and only 4 teammates). Same argument holds. I recommend you start thinking before posting.

 

The same logic still applies. They would still be matched up equally as often as an unfriend

 

I recommend you to stop thinking you're smarter as others by implying they are unable to think. One can't type without thinking what to write.
If what's written is hard to understand for your logic, the problem is not at the writer but the reader, in which case a polite explanation request is more proper as an hidden insult...

True but you forgot to import into the equation the difference in infamy gain/loss in mean time that you would be matched-up again vs that carrier, taking into account that the player base is not just a handful of players...
True but you forgot to import the difference in infamy gain/loss into the equation, that you would have gained/lost in the time between, that you would be matched-up again vs that carrier, taking into account that the player base is not just a handful of players...

edit: sorry for such a line above, even i have difficulty to understand what i wrote there gramatically...
Let me try to reword it in mean time.
Hope the green version is more understandable as the compressed red version.
(Sorry compression is a habit left from being an assembly programmer YEARS ago )

 

But

But you forget that players are not evenly distributed within infamy. There are less people the higher up, which means the same people are more likely to be matched together. In addition to how not all players play at once, it is safe to say that people being continuously matched up is relatively common. Even at my infamy, ~2300, I see the same people very often. Also, there is a zero-sum gain in infamy during battles as the same infamy is lost that is gained. It is created by new users and destroyed by The nightmare when the season ends and they are reset.

 

Exactly that's why my opinion is that the current matchmaking is faulty...

 

And my point is that the system is not faulty, there is just a limited amount of people playing at any given time. Until there are enough people playing at any given time, there will be instances where the same people will get matched together.

 

Then my suggestion to you is: Start a fresh account and see if there aren't enough players online at ANY given time.
Not enough high rating players? Ofcourse and there never will be as the system is a pyramid type by design, the higher you get the fewer left.
A system that forces the top of the iceberg to mingle into the lower parts is not faulty? you can't be serious...