Infamy stability suggestion

Any rating system I've been familiar with has a much more gradual change than what we have in Battle Bay, where it's not only possible to change by hundreds of infamy in a day, but it's common. It results in a wild and frustrating ride for most players, and it enables infamy tankers to improve their rewards.

My suggestion is to stop swinging infamy each match, and go to a moving average with a floor.
Infamy calculations would be far more accurate using a moving average (30 day / 500 matches) .
Establish an Infamy floor at 800 below max.

Both of these would
a) largely eliminate the infamy tanker issue.
b) There would be no more instant gratification gained from tanking and then seal clubbing.
c) It would drastically improve the matchmaking system, which is largely based on this flawed infamy system.

What do you think?

PS: This is a continuation of a thread in the general area that should be a suggestion: https://forum.battlebay.net/threads...d-penalize-infamy-tankers-not-everyone.16014/

 

bump

 

I'd much rather see them implement a hidden matchmaking-rating, which would be some kind of averaging of your infamy over x timeperiod. A system where your infamy is a representation of how well you are doing as a snapshot, and your matchups are determined by how well you are doing over time.

It would also make the days after a Nightmare reset less silly than it currently is. There is no good gameplay in the matchmaking engine pretending 6k infamy players have 4k.

 

To be clear, that is what I'm suggesting... at which point there's no need for the instant-infamy number.

 

I like the idea but I'm still a bit confused about the root problem. Yes, infamy swings are an issue. But I tend to think the bigger issue is that the devs place way too much value on skill and not nearly enough on gear when they do the match making. Matching based on skill & gear would also prevent the seal clubbing. You wanna go club seals you'll have to do it in a seal sized boat with seal sized guns. Tanking wouldn't really accomplish much. Sure, it'd lower one of the parameters in the equation but not the other.

If they weren't relying on that infamy so strongly then the swings wouldn't matter so much.

 

If your items are better, your infamy will go up. If you have fantastic items and you suck you will be somewhere in the middle. Seal clubbing is an issue only because infamy dropping is enabled by the current instant-infamy system, which, as I explained above, will be much less of an issue by averaging out a player's rating. If you put a floor on someone's infamy they are stuck in higher level battles. If they are seal clubbing, their infamy will go up. The only issue left are those people who purposefully lose half their battles and seal club in the other half. At that point I don't even care, it's still a 50% W/L ratio.

 

Skill doesn’t get you very far in this game. What really matters is damage dealt versus damage recieved, and that’s just equipment + maths. If you’re extraordinarily skilled, then you might be able to land a few extra hits, and avoid a bit of damage, but that can also happen through dumb luck, so it’s barely noticeable from game to game. If you’re fighting against someone with much better gear, then all your skill might just mean that you die after 15 seconds instead of 10, but if you die either way, it’s negligable.

 

This problem is already present in the current matchmaking. There really isn't any point in upgrading anything, any upgrading will give you some advantage for a few matches, until your infamy rises enough to pit you against stronger opponents. Hence there is no nett gain, except maybe for those who get high seeing bigger damage numbers just for the sake of it.

 

That’s true for many weapons, but there are a few items, such as the Tesla Bolt, where upgrading it, actually, does make it better.

I think a lvl1 common TB has a base stun duration of 2.5 seconds! That’s pointless at any infamy. But later it becomes very powerful, and adds a whole other dimension of strategy to the game.

Even for weapons, you’re able to add more perks and stuff later in the game, which makes them more interesting, and varied.

So there is some incentive to levelling up. I think it ultimately leads to a more satisfying and strategic game, as you unlock more options (at least in theory).

 

BB infamy system is the worse I ever seen. It doen't give an idea of yours skills. It doesn't increase with the time (and money) you spend in the game. Playing video games since 1992, I never seen such system. It's an ramdon system !
This issue has been already discussed in few topics. No change....

 

I'm still unclear why there is so much concern with incentives and item classes. Matchmaking system (using infamy) is intended bubble you up/down into matches with equal opponents.

What I want is a stable infamy system... the infamy whiplash is unwanted with it's unintended consequences, and completely avoidable using tried and true ranking algorithms used by most other competitive leagues and sports.

 

Rather a stable infamy system, we need a incentive system to measure our progression. And keep players in game.
The current BB system is not. Some are desapointed to see infamy decreased after matches and matches, effort and effort.... Some gave up. And I m close to give up as well after 4437 battles and a infamy going up and down between 1250 and 1650 without an understable reason.

 

That's evidence to the need for a more stable infamy system. It's ok to go up and down... gradually as a better measure of skill/game progress. Infamy whiplash without known cause is nothing but an exercise in frustration.

 

If that is true then this is a casual progression game and nothing more. You grind away to get gear to club seals. You feel powerful because you put in all that time and money to get that gear. I'm not Rovio and I can't name their vision for this game but I was hoping it was a competitive combat shooter.

When I look at all the competitive progression games I've played in the past you didn't get more powerful so you could dominate your enemies. You got more powerful so you could progress and end up fighting tougher enemies with your tougher gear. The payoff you get for winning is faster progression not the ability to club seals. Does that leave a problem for the whales? Yes it does. I assume they spent thousands of dollars for exactly the purpose of seal-clubbing. I don't think my proposal completely eliminates that. Infamy would still be in the mix, just not as utterly dominant as it is now. But a typical mark 3 with his legendaries and 500 infamy still sucks. I know. I beat them regularly.

I guess I was hoping for a game wherein I faced stiff competition rather than one where you are either a seal or a clubber.

*blink* So then the fact that my position in the season is surrounded by captains quite a few levels above me is not relevant? Obviously it does get me further than it gets most people. Isn't that what skill is supposed to look like? Your "maths" don't, unfortunately, agree with reality. I think you should check your math

The problem is what happens when that occurs. At that point progression breaks down and I am penalized for my winning. That implies another possible fix. If I'm low boat on the team and I contribute even remotely reasonably then I ought to be getting some awesome rewards.... sufficient to help close the gear gap so that we can do what progression games do... progress. Also sufficient to cover the loss in ALL the other rewards (stars boxes and guild quests I think if you fixed the rewards otherwise).

Honestly I am not sure how to fix this because the current system is such a hash. Until they stop providing such strong incentives to losing it will remain that way forever. I cannot imagine how I'd balance a progression system when the players are deliberately messing with it and doing so for compelling reasons.

 

Heh! If you like, we can meet in the Bay for a 1vs1, and check my maths together?

You can show me what your skills look like, and I’ll show you what a L30 Epic Exploding Cannon looks like, when it does subtraction

 

I can't tell if you're making a joke or not. You think I don't fight those? What do you think exists as 1250 infamy? Obviously, I do poorly and in a 1:1 I'd die quickly. So the trick becomes to cower behind my bigger team mates and look for opportunities to exploit. How is that not obvious?

In terms of my l337 skilz, I don't know what to tell you man. The season board speaks for itself. If skill doesn't matter then why are almost all the boats anywhere near me quite a few levels higher (which includes, by the way, also being M5 with an extra slot... so 25% additional firepower on top of the bigger guns.

I'm beginning to feel like we're playing some sort of game here. If skill doesn't "get you far" then can you explain Blacktail for me please? My understanding is that he just CRUSHED the nightmare league. Are you telling me his gear is that much better than the average top-end nightmare player? I don't think it is.

 

It doesn't do so well when it can't hit.

 

I think the key word you're missing is damage RECEIVED... If you can stay alive, you can deal dmg and win. That's why speeders are so good. The dmg received is so low.

 

Since I happen to be a min/max spreadsheet guy I thought I'd do a bit of maths of my own.



What you're looking at is the rank vs level for Warrior Div 1 (top 25). The distance from the linear trend line indicates how much better or worse that particular player is (below the line is better than average). In my case, my l337 skilz are worth 7 levels or about 22 ranks. And yes, per this chart to be where I'm at I ought to be in an M5. I agree. That's what I see when I fight.

One of the things I love about this game is that skill does matter. It's just being skilled also hurts your progression. Oddly, you are rewarded less for being good than for being average.... A LOT less if you count guild quests.