Post 4.2 Important Updates

I am the first ONE!! And thx for quick update

 

Thank you!
My confidence in the developers was shattered and I feared they would be driving this game to the wall.
The community has been heard - I hope everything will be fine.

 

yeah the granular infamy or whatever they say it...WAS SCARY

 

Thank you @The Grim Repair

 

THANKS for fixing these. Did wanna see granular fixed, but its fine, old system worked. System was always okay though lol. Its the matching. Especially fixer balancing we have issues with

 

Nice to have the bug fixed, well done but what about the long term bugs like invisible ships etc take it devs can’t be bothered to fix those?

 

The problem with the infamy update was that it wasn’t working as intended and players could not figure out how it actually worked. Old infamy system unfortunately was also flawed. Since we can’t choose our teams, infamy remains largely a measure of how well the match making system works. How well the rest of our teammates play is completely out of a players control, but dominates how infamy is awarded. Either throw it out entirely or make it 100% a reflection of performance please.

 

I liked the idea of performance based infamy.. I just have no idea how the new system was working it seemed completely random. Please develop an infamy system that rewards weaker ships more for their performance vs more powerful ships which have advantage. Also punish players that don’t contribute in a battle and especially punish floaters. Ship that does 0 dmg should never be rewarded and should be some negative consequence to them.

 

This also need to be fixed . when enter for battle it shows wrong name . it happening in Casual , have not played Ranked and Event because changes are not good . Ranked is fixed but make old style events . no multiple ships .

 

Wait wait..no firebomb nerf?

 

So you're saying that this system was the best you could come up with and because it didn't work you're going to scrap the whole idea?

I thought the infamy was supposed to be tied to battle performance and not some super complicated formula that gives out results that look like they could've been pulled by some RNG. I'm sure majority of the community still wants performance related infamy IF YOU CAN CREATE A SYSTEM THAT'S ACTUALLY BASED ON PERFORMANCE. The one we had now obviously wasn't doing that. That's why people were frustrated, not because they didn't like the idea.

How hard can it really be? You're already rating battle performance by the amount of stars you get, so why not tie the infamy with stars? Both winning and losing have three different levels of stars you can earn (3, 2 or 1 stars for winning and 2, 1 or 0 for losing) so couldn't you make it something like this, for example:
- 3 star win: +24 infamy
- 2 star win: +22 infamy
- 1 star win: +20 infamy
- 2 star loss: -20 infamy
- 1 star loss: -22 infamy
- 0 star loss: -24 infamy

You wouldn't even have to create separate contribution judging system to reward stars and infamy if they both were tied together. You could focus on fine tuning the star system if you think it still needs tweaks and the infamy system would automatically follow these changes.

So please, don't scrap the performance tied infamy idea, just do it better

 

Really really nice....

 

Unfortunately tying infamy to the star/coin system is not a solution either, unless BattleBay removed all ships from the game except for Shooters.

As one of many yellow boat players, the Star / Coin distribution has never been fair to us. These algorithms favor damage dealing ships. I personally don't make a big deal about it, because Star Crates are not of much value anyway(once or twice a year I might pull a FULL epic item, or a legendary piece) and for coins(at least CTF events gave yellow boats an advantage, so it evens out).
If they were to consider tying infamy to the already flawed STAR / COIN awarding system, then you will have every player who doesn't play shooter showing up with the "torches and pitchforks".
I have been in winning battles where I did 1000 damage or even ZERO damage because I didn't even have a chance to fire more than a couple weapons due to constantly being targeted by the enemy and needing to cycle non-stop between my nitros and overboost. So all those misses I have caused are firebombs and explosive cannons that likely would have been hits on my teammates.

I personally don't believe a truly fair and equitable infamy distribution is possible based on individual performance. I am all for Floaters getting their rewards cut, but the developers have never shown me that they can accurately calculate how much a fixer/speeder/enforcer/reaper/defender/guardian contributes to a win.

 

I agree and that would be so simple for them to implement, though I think it should be 25, 20, 15. Floaters should get 0 always and have a separate metric to shame them and reduce their rewards for future matches until they improve their reliability (like a visible floater penalty flag that they have to earn the right to remove by playing good battles)

 

Yeah for sure, I'm not saying the star system is working perfectly at the moment. But idk why it's so hard for them to balance it out..? They have the data of millions of battles so they could sure adjust the triggering damage / healing / other contribution values differently for each ship.

So out of those millions of battles check the amount of damage that's usually required to earn three stars, then compare it to other ships' data and find the number that's within the same % range. That's just for example, of course there could also be other solutions. I know your teammates' contribution has a role when awarding stars but that wouldn't change the idea, right?

 

I really liked the idea of granular infamy, I think it makes sense. Why not just leverage existing logic that controls stars and coins? Infamy games are worse than heart attacks at this point, you've got 20% control over the outcome and there's a 100% chance that you've got an asshole on your team.
Also, HCTDM is a gamechanger and a great idea, especially for players like me that have wracked up over 25k games. Gives you something to use all those extra weapons for so thank you for that.
I also would love the ability to chat messages in the final score screen.
Also, if I shoot missiles and they hit an overhang above a bunch of ships, can we make it so the overhang collapses and destroys the ships underneath? lol Ive always wanted to do that 1 v 5.
Always remember, pitchforks and torches means that your community cares. 2.5+ years playing this game and you guys still amaze me.

 

The idea of aligning infamy to personal contribution and relative rank of opponents is actually a great one, and I hope the dev team does not give up on it after this initial attempt. There is actually existing research and algorithms that are developed specifically for multi-player and multi-team games that are used for player rank and matchmaking. Xbox uses TrueSkill and now there is also improved TrueSkill2 - https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/res...kill-2-improved-bayesian-skill-rating-system/ - which seems like it could be a great fit. It could also improve matchmaking. Would require significant effort on customizing some of the parameters of individual contribution and experimenting with different models that capture the different ways ships contribute (dmg, kills, heals, stun, freezing, drawing and avoiding fire, etc) but with the amount of battle data available to Rovio it is feasible even though not simple.

 

I've had a bug happening with my standard cannon
None of the damage that I deal with it goes to my quests!

 

I honestly loved the idea of granular infamy and would like to see it used. The problem was that the 4.2 version was poorly implemented and players with higher contributions would sometimes lose more/gain less infamy than players with minimal contributions (it honestly looked bugged at times). I'd love to see a working version of it implemented at some point.

In regards to the bandage exploit, has anything been done to punish the bug abusers or benefit the players who played fair? I don't mean to whine but those who did take advantage of the exploit clearly performed better and received more coins (and perks/ship pieces) because of their abuse of the exploit.