Infamy rewarded based on performance

+24 for a win -24 for a loss +1 or -1 for a draw and I'm still not even sure who/why gets awarded the +1. Really not agreeing with this since so many games it seems to be that I have to carry the team by sinking 3-4 boats myself or lose. I have no problem with the matchmaking system as it is, just how infamy is rewarded or taken away. If the Infamy was rewarded based on performance I think peoples infamy would better represent their actual skill and eventually would help the matchmaking system to better filter the players. Quite simple really, goes something like this:

Winning team------ Losing team
1st +24----------------1st -8
2nd +20---------------2nd -12
3rd +16----------------3rd -16
4th +12----------------4th -20
5th +8------------------5th -24

Here is a good example, the 4 on my team did nothing and did not deserve 24 points, the poor player in the Mk3 on the losing team played awesome and did not deserve to lose 24 points. True skill of players would be better reflected with a point system like this.


Do love this game I must say!

 

Actually in higher level battles,I found that sometimes the losing team will only -20 and the winning team +20 only
If u look cosely in a mismatch this sometimes may occur

 

Missing the point man.

 

While I wouldlove something similar to be introduced how does it decide who is in each position. In your example above its a little easier to do it by damage. In most later games there is almost always a fixer should be rewarded for healing, then there are the defenders who sit and take on 3 so the shooters can have an easier job of hitting them. Of course there is my least favorite class the yellows who do alot (sometimes) by just stunning or even just distracting.
How do you take all of those into account of who comes 1st 2nd 3rd etc

 

Good point Emilia, would be easy to track the amount of HP repaired by fixers and attribute that as points but the others would still have to be based on damage given.

 

I actually thought once same as you shamus-6-6-6 but then realized how hard that would be to get everything calculated as Emilia said. This infamy system has it's upsides and downsides. Unfortunately this kind of thing is the downside (assuming that those 4 from your team didn't actually do anything valueable for your team in that match). That doesn't tell how much their actions distracted the enemy or how much damage they recived. There could have been the possibility for that you would have been under fire. In that scenario you'd have been the one with low damage made because of too hard hits in too short time if you know what I mean.

I hope this opens your eyes a bit and gives you another point of viewing this situation.

 

Well obviously the healer and defender aren't going to get high damage. How do you propose to work that out?

ell

 

Doesn't work. Damage dealt isn't the only metric.

Matchmaking is the issue, not infamy. Matchmaking should add other aspects into the algorithm on top of infamy:

• Weapon Levels (based on DPS)
• Speed, Shield+Tesla Shield, Bandage Levels
• Ship Level & Class
• Crew Level
• Season League and current rank in league.
• Winning percentage
• Fixer Level or Healing ability (HPS?)

 

The trouble is using weapon levels by DPS is that there is massive differences in DPS. Would you say overall a sniper or napalm does more damage? Most people will choose sniper yet my sniper (which is better then my napalm) only has 44 DPS and my napalm has well over 200 DPS. Healing has the same problem. Most healers will say repair pulse is better but its DPS equivalent is less then the repair boxes for the same reason.

Ship levels especially only 1 level difference isnt alot. The number of times I would kill 1v1 a mk6 when I was mk5, or even vice versa now now that I have a mk6 and I get slaughtered by mk5's

 

I'm sure Rovio Battle Bay Developers can get metric data on overall weapon effectiveness based on the total damage dealt of the mass community and calculate the DPS factor ratio for each weapon and at each level. There must be statistics. Of course all damage isn't 1:1. Fixer healing would be another factor, some statistician would be needed to put everything into a linear scale. DPS is only one of the many other metrics i mentioned above where you can grab granular player/ship strength from. So in other words, when you switch ships, your matchmaker factor is different from the other. Which is perfect sense.

 

If building games was easy and the perfect system was out there then it would've already been set up. It's obviously not and is still a work in progress. Things take time and will slowly be worked on. I wish matchmaking would just pair me with good players. Then I can just be carried to the big leagues

 

Easier said than done. You're stepping dangerously close to the territory of data mining, maching learning, etc. Even if it can be done, are you sure you want the dev to focus their limited resource more on this issue which is besically just small inconvenient rather than something like new content?

 

It's called Game balance. Lots of games do this, including Games like Clash Royale etc.

Infamy is really just how many +/- wins x 24 points, then after a certain threshold it's +20. There's really no metric here to be honest, it's simple "sum".
This current infamy based matchmaking requires little to zero algorithms to create a match. There's no consideration of what class of a ship. I'm willing to bet that on random matches where one team has a Fixer and where the opponent team does not, that the Fixer team wins over 70% of the time. So can't that be somehow thrown into there to check for Fixers and adjust accordingly, ie; fixer vs fixer, higher infamy scale on one side without a fixer?

What I propose has no machine learning, it's a static but more in-depth calculation, once there's a set scale; finding a match is just as quick as the current method.

As for the small inconvenience. I don't think so. I think for a game to be enjoyable, it needs balance. Matchmaking is very important in this game I think, at higher levels I think the "quality" of the player is less of a concern, but the pool is a lot smaller. So what tends to happen is that you have more disparity. Having such a huge gap of disparity creates unfairness and takes away from the enjoyment/quality/satisfaction of the game. Nobody enjoys being one-shot killed.

I understand that this game is still in beta(limited release is essentially beta no matter how they spin it). If they keep this current matchmaker for global launch, I think this problem will be even more of an issue in the mid range. They'll likely change the matchmaker anyway to fit the amount of new players, so work needs to be done regardless.

 

Nobody said it was easy. Creating a great and profitable game isn't easy either, but that's an important priority I'm sure for Rovio. Matchmaking is probably the MOST important aspect of Battle Bay, it's even more important when Guild Wars will be introduced, whenever that will be. Having a competitive match dictates fun, losses can be fun too as long as it was a tussle match. Matches where the other team was blown out via a number of factors; fixer on one team, infamy disparity, suicide, afk, poor skilled players etc isn't fun and would turn off players. Same goes with real sports, nobody likes being on a bad team.

 

Yes yes yes...rovio wouldn't want this more fair system because, the way it is, the system provokes people into purchasing the v.i.p. package to get an edge. With infamy reflecting true skill there would be no incentive to purchase anything to get an edge because they already have the edge (actual skill).

 

This is getting stale even for me:
There's no "I" in "Team"