2 Things That Are A JOKE

1. Matchups. You need to make team matchups fair. I don't know if you are manipulating these so people will spend more money or what, but they are a total joke. When players get above a infamy level, you pit teams against that player. This is widely reported.

2. When you do #1, you reduce the amount of goodies the player gets. Another total joke.

I am going to quit this game if you do not fix this. I have given Rovio plenty of my hard earned money. NOT ANOTHER DIME until you fix this.

 

Matchmaking does not have a feature to intentionally make a certain player lose if they get above a specific infamy. Rovio can't "fix" that if it doesn't exist, sorry :/. My guess is that you notice the losing streaks more than the winning streaks because they make you frustrated, which leads to you playing worse and losing more. I find that me making one dumb mistake can lose a whole battle, and I make those mistakes way more often when I'm annoyed or tired, so don't play during those times!

 

On the subject of streaks... in a previous topic, I decided (just for arguments sake) to collect a sample of over 100 of my recent games, and tally up the streaks. I then compared the results to an equal number of coin flips (which I used an app to generate).

The outcomes were ‘reasonably’ similar, with short streaks being much more frequent, and longer streaks becoming progressively less frequent. The longest streaks (6+) being only a couple of percent. This is in line with what you would expect from the matchups being ‘largely’ even.

I think part of the reason long streaks appear more noticeable on Battle Bay is because they take up more physical space in the logs. For example, 6 short streaks, where you alternate winning and losing, would be the same size as 1 long streak of 6 losses in a row. So your battle log appears to be ‘mostly’ made up of these large areas of solid colour, but streak for streak, they are actually the least common.

Also Battle Bay isn’t really random, as you can affect the outcome with skill. So if you do lose a number of games through ‘bad luck’, which causes you to be ‘underrated’, then there is an increased chance that you will go on a winning streak later (now requiring only normal luck), as you climb back to your proper rating.

 

SO in other words... your skills/boats/equipment do not really matter to determine the outcome of the battle, as it only contribute to 20% (or if you're good, 30%) to the overall team power ??
I've experienced so many battles where no matter how "good" I played or how much damages I scored, my team still lose, mostly because the other members can't even do their job properly. Pls tell me I'm not the only one who got this feeling in this game............

 

Well, I have always understood the phrase ‘in other words’, to mean that someone is about to semantically reframe a concept for clarity or contrast, but that the general subject matter should ‘at least’ remain somewhat intact.

Since I was talking about the perceived frequency of streaks, and you appear to be talking about something not related to perceived frequency of streaks... then no.

It can happen, but it also happens to everyone else, and is offset by the games in which you play badly but your team wins.

Here is a game I played, which kind of proves that equipment (and maybe a bit of skill), does ‘entirely’ affect the outcome of games.


So actually it does matter how well you play (how good your equipment is). If you can kill all 5 unfriends on your own, then you’ll always win. If you can’t, then you’ll just have to take your chances.

 

Another day, another poster who's incapeable of understanding how a simple matchmaking engine works.

So much facepalm