Jump to content


fixed games


  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

apartclassic #21 Posted 16 October 2020 - 08:30 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Advanced Member
  • 26320 battles
  • 1,166
  • [UNIC] UNIC
  • Member since:
    01-21-2014

*sigh* same thing over and over...

 

Game was always like that. You ALWAYS had a higher chance of landing in lower tier (unless, after bots were introduced, there were only 1-2 humans in battle; if there is no other human, you will always be top tiered, if there's a human on the other side, it's 50/50 who's top tiered, however game tries - depending on available players - to match tiers in such cases). Tiers 4 and 7 are especially painful in that regard, being technology break points (transition from bi- to monoplanes, then from propellers to jets). In a way it's beneficial, giving one chance for better xp (in short: xp is constant and hard-capped per tier, however when you're fighting higher tier planes, they generally tend to have more hp than your own tier, thus by doing more damage, you're earning more xp; same xp per dmg, but more dmg done). Please stop suggesting there's anything 'unnatural' in this, MM simply works that way, more odds to be lower tier; that's exactly the reason why some people do anchored flights and abuse the system.


You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day

 


TungstenHitman #22 Posted 17 October 2020 - 12:43 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 2260 battles
  • 167
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

Ya great comment yet practically the exact same comment I responded to bs Bob and his analysis lol. Accept that was specifically a comment to debunk the bs as though he gave us some sort 3rd party and computerized assisted deep insight since it's obviously just blurting what WG openly divulge in their explanation of how MM works and rest is just as a result of typical bridges between P1, P2 and P3 in which most players will take the lowest possible option to satisfy daily missions for each period, and as such, inevitably skews likely tiering outcomes even further through sheer saturation of player numbers within those tiers. We know all that, at least those who are interested and give a F, this is not the topic discussion though.

 

If we actually come back to the topic at hand, as mentioned in the OP, what we are actually discussing here(before bs Bob stepped in), was the blatantly weighted construction of the so called "random" MM whereby far too often, and I would say more often than not, MM constructs battles(when there's lots of humans online) where one team gets practically all the class-strong aircraft and they're also mostly specialized(all just by pure random chance of course))) while the other team gets sweet F all and the shhhh airplanes tier for tier. This isn't even about being top or bottom tier it's about these very much NOT random total hatchet job bs MM constructed battles.

 

Add to that, one team gets the dumb shhh bots whereby I have encountered friendly bot bombers and ground attack aircraft actually travelling from a far distance, into a sector ALREADY controlled by the friendlies, and yet they still dork into these already controlled sectors instead of obviously going to the enemy or non-controlled sectors while in contrast the other teams bots are straight out of the F'ing Matrix lol, and just dismantle everything that moves with skill and reactions far beyond that of any actual human player lol... immediately knowing the directional changes players make and immediately countering them in nanoseconds along with bot bombers and ground attack aircraft that take out ground targets with laser guided precision in seconds, immediately flipping mines and all this crap just basically determines the outcome of the battle and as such, is effectively fixing the result. It's a form of nerfing and buffing, out of "human" control, and so it becomes luck rather than actual skill plus RNG can be so negatively weighted in a particular battle that it renders all the hours of grinding skills and upgrading equipment completely F'ing pointless since the game "randomly" decides you can go F yourself vs this aircraft or alternatively you can't possibly fail vs another same situation even while using a crappy stock everything with basic non-upgraded equipment and a crappy pilot lol(within realistic parameters obviously). Personally I always found the "not within your control" element of these games(human players decisions not withstanding obviously) to be complete horse shhh tbh and not "interesting" or a fun sort of variable.

 

Sure, we can say that everyone will experience the good and the bad evenly and also that good players win more and bad players fail more. Fine, but that's not the point at all ,the point is that regardless of everyone experiencing this bs evenly across a large sample size it still can't be called "random" unless of course we are to call the purposefully weighted team construction and thus most likely outcome of a result via horseshhh match fixing MM "random" lol, just because everyone gets a rub of the same brush, that doesn't make it ok ff*. Fine, it's definitely not a case of "picking on one player" and I have never doubted that for one second the notion is laughable, BUT, the fact the team construction and bot ability is so laughably weighted and not at all random outside of which side you happen to fall on after you click that battle button, THAT's what's totally bs and it's match fixing what ever way you want to cut it. 


Edited by TungstenHitman, 17 October 2020 - 01:06 AM.


apartclassic #23 Posted 17 October 2020 - 04:01 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Advanced Member
  • 26320 battles
  • 1,166
  • [UNIC] UNIC
  • Member since:
    01-21-2014
 

View PostTungstenHitman, on 17 October 2020 - 12:43 AM, said:

(...)

 

Nope, that's also not true. You are describing a cognitive bias and finding a regularity where there is none. I talked about it too many times already - there is no meddling by script, literally nothing but MM trying to set up battles ASAP, but using imprecise criteria (not seeing specialization, and thinking all planes within a class are equal - as in LF equals HF, because both are fighters), and then RNG of shots and bombs, of some bots crashing and some bots not crashing. Yes, bots know player's input and react to it; yes, bots snipe better than humans. That's the extent of 'rigging' the game. Nothing more than that, nothing premeditated, nothing malignant. Because - cui bono? What for?....

 

I inadvertently tested it. A few months ago I did play for 7 days, 4-6 hours each day, without my usual attention to daily missions. I played only to earn a lot of xp. Didn't do flights, didn't use bombers, played t7-9 (no low tier sealclubbing). Over a week of playing like that, my WR was 93%. According to some suggestions this shouldn't be possible, because there is rigging by WG. So, yeah....


You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day

 


RoyalFlyingCorps #24 Posted 17 October 2020 - 10:07 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Advanced Member
  • 17733 battles
  • 1,878
  • Member since:
    05-05-2016

View PostTungstenHitman, on 15 October 2020 - 08:51 PM, said:

In this comment you're just stating the obvious.

 

As the responses preceding yours show, not everybody thought I was stating the obvious.  I quite enjoyed the confident, yet subjective, discursive and fact-free, expatiation that followed.

 

The value of statistics are that sometimes they confirm a common impression and sometimes they contradict it.  The response of the thoughtful in the latter case is to reconsider their position.  Luckily for you, you are spared what would no doubt be a painful and difficult effort because, with respect to tiers 4 & 7, the common impression is correct.

 

You may sit down now; your presence has been noted.  Alternatively, feel free to embarrass yourself further by posting again.


Edited by RoyalFlyingCorps, 17 October 2020 - 10:20 AM.


Mournfull #25 Posted 17 October 2020 - 12:54 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 13813 battles
  • 93
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    01-05-2019

How about if just we just say whether you think it needs to be changed or if you are happy with it?

No bragging or name calling or intellectual put downs are needed really.

Just say if you are happy with it as it stands.

 

Not happy.  please fix!

 

 



TungstenHitman #26 Posted 17 October 2020 - 01:49 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 2260 battles
  • 167
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

View Postapartclassic, on 17 October 2020 - 04:01 AM, said:

 

 

Nope, that's also not true. 

 

Yes you say that and yet go on to contradict that by saying and I quote "Yes, bots know player's input and react to it; yes, bots snipe better than humans. That's the extent of 'rigging' the game." and so you're saying it's not true and yet true. I didn't say anything else about it unless you'd like to outline where that was and in regards to what? I clearly said that I think the notion of battles being rigged in regards specific players being singled out is laughable, and I also said that since the skill level of bots is a major ingredient in the outcome of the result since most all the teams players are bots obviously, and as such, if one team gets the assassin bots while the other team gets the clue sniffing crayon eating bots, that's clearly a form of match fixing since most all the bloody players on both teams are bots lol. 

 

View Postapartclassic, on 17 October 2020 - 04:01 AM, said:

 

 

I talked about it too many times already - there is no meddling by script, literally nothing but MM trying to set up battles ASAP, but using imprecise criteria (not seeing specialization, and thinking all planes within a class are equal - as in LF equals HF, because both are fighters), and then RNG of shots and bombs, of some bots crashing and some bots not crashing.

 

No, I don't subscribe to the notion that one team gets all the Spits while the other team gets none as just a case of MM trying to establish a battle ASAP, it's just shhhh design. If there's clearly 4 or 5 Spits(for example, can be any tier strong aircraft of the same type) waiting in the queue to get a battle it doesn't take any additional time to split them somewhat equally between both teams does it? So the notion of just MM trying to create fast battles for being why one team gets 4 or 5 Spits while the other team gets none is bs. What it is, is shhhh MM design and nothing more.

 

Now, MM not factoring specialized aircraft, yes, we know that, I already included that in my comment about BS Bob and is "analyses" of thousands of battles when I stated that this is not his discovery and something WG openly share. Indeed, the status of aircraft and pilot skills and equipment etc is on paper as not being a factor(It should be btw, so far as reasonably practicable without creating too much delay in getting a battle). and yet time and time again we see MM construct battles where one team gets 5 or 6 specialized aircraft while the other gets one or even none, which leaves me doubting the fact that specialized status is not factored. If not, then why does happen so often that one team gets lots while the other gets none? By logic of not being factored, it would just about fall as a 50/50 spread, but that's not what we're seeing most the time, so it would certainly raise my suspicions.

 

View Postapartclassic, on 17 October 2020 - 04:01 AM, said:

 

I inadvertently tested it. A few months ago I did play for 7 days, 4-6 hours each day, without my usual attention to daily missions. I played only to earn a lot of xp. Didn't do flights, didn't use bombers, played t7-9 (no low tier sealclubbing). Over a week of playing like that, my WR was 93%. According to some suggestions this shouldn't be possible, because there is rigging by WG. So, yeah....

 

"So yeah..." nothing lol. It's always possible to win and lose regardless of how one sided it goes. Indeed if there's one thing that seems to hold solid in MM it's that it does not factor the players skills or win rate(I dare say) because very often the teams or players with lots of specialized or superior tier for tier class aircraft are just inept sea cucumbers and so that's why it's always worth having a try no matter what MM deals a player, because we just don't know how good or bad the players are. Winners find a way to win, that's why I bagged Kolobanovs medals in WoT against top players in an all human mode game, not this players and mostly bots bs lol. Equally, losers find a way to lose, that's why they have low winrates and why better players have higher win rates. The only thing to say about that is the difficulty of the challenge is what we're talking about here, via match fixing with good or dumb bots and good or bad team construction via the amount of tier strong aircraft and specialized aircraft each team has, which to me, seems suspiciously pre-determined. Does that mean you can't win? of course not, does it mean you can't lose? of course not. But that takes nothing away from the suspiciously blatant way these teams constructions are far too often weighted. 

 

A player can also play nothing but the tier for tier best aircraft and if their sad enough, also use gold ammo costing real world money. Doing this obviously heavily offsets bs MM since the aircraft is the best of its tier, in its best offering, used by a good player and also backed up with gold ammo which in this game is blatantly pay to win since there's no real tactics in WoWP, there's no armor, no angling, no side scraping, no sniping behind bushes lol. It's just the 3D of the sky and good awareness really, plus a good knowledge of all aircraft so you know what to take on and what to avoid, where one is weak and where the other is strong. But that's it really. grab more sectors than the enemy team, and get your shots on the other aircraft before he gets his shots on you. In those head to head charges, if one has gold ammo and the other doesn't, the gold ammo wins, and that's all there is to this game really. If you get into a turn fight with an enemy that can turn better you lose, if you can turn better than him, you win.

 

View Postapartclassic, on 17 October 2020 - 04:01 AM, said:

 

 

Nothing more than that, nothing premeditated, nothing malignant. Because - cui bono? What for?....

 

For me that's the most interesting aspect of WG's MM system, the "but why would they? what's the point??" and for any of us that want to know we'd have to ask WG since nobody else would know. My guess would be that the reason is to basically challenge the playerbase with different levels of difficulty so that the really good players feel challenged for some battles while the really bad players get a break for some battles too, and I guess that to WG devs, this would in a way, keep everyone happy. Don't get me wrong I'm most definitely not suggesting that high win rate players get bad teams and bad rng while bad players get the opposite, I doubt that would be the case and would be a bit too individualized which I highly doubt WG would bother with but for me what it translates into is a really shhhhh MM system and bot behavior in general. 

 

As for the "always bottom tier" template, I already covered that in another comment and it's clearly just WG's business template to entice players to keep on up-tiering under the false belief that things will get better and they will lose less etc, but ultimately with players ending up in the top tiers which would be tailored to mostly require running a premium account, at least that's how it translates in WoT and WoWS. 

 

View Postapartclassic, on 17 October 2020 - 04:01 AM, said:

played t7-9 (no low tier sealclubbing)

 

This is interesting to be though a little off topic(Ok totally off topic lol). Now, I haven't played about tier6 yet(because I'm a big WW1 and WW2 fan, not post war or Korea war era stuff) and so I have to ask. In a game where, so far as I have encountered so far, almost the entirety of teams are comprised of bots, who are these seals you are referring too? If this was WoT I would say fine, within reason of course, but fine since the game is popular and teams are mostly all real ppl and new players coming through those lower tiers but NOT this game bro, not this game. Here we have MAYBE, a few new players coming through, otherwise all you are encountering(at least so far as my recent experience goes as a relatively new player) is experienced players playing tier with aircraft from certain era's and styles that they prefer to play... so where's the seal clubbing?? bots?? All you're going to be playing against(outside of maybe weekends natural population increase) is mostly just one or two other human players(of which most are experienced too) and the rest are all bots so... you feel bad about bots? lol! Well, hate to break it to you but most all battles of any tier I have played so far are mostly comprised of bots so what a player is doing at T2 is pretty much the exact same thing he will find himself doing at T5 or T6 etc, which is playing against and with mostly bot players.


Edited by TungstenHitman, 17 October 2020 - 02:57 PM.


TungstenHitman #27 Posted 17 October 2020 - 02:12 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 2260 battles
  • 167
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

View PostRoyalFlyingCorps, on 17 October 2020 - 10:07 AM, said:

 

You may sit down now; your presence has been noted.  Alternatively, feel free to embarrass yourself further by posting again.

 

Lol... no I don't do embarrassed unless maybe my gentleman parts fell out of my pants in front of ppl should I forget to pull up my zipper, but I'd mostly find that funny too. I've triggered you, I've embarrassed you by calling you out on your bs claims, I get that, and honestly I'm not bothered about it. If you're going to go around making bold claims then back it up and so far as I'm concerned I never said anything as being fact, just my opinions and findings, and that was all. However, you made these claims about working in IT and having access to software where you ran deep testing for any dubious anomalies in this game across thousands of your battles and I called bs on that unless you could back it up with some screenshots etc for us all to see, which as of yet, you haven't so the BS Bob status still stands.

 

If you'd like to quote me on comments where I should feel embarrassed by all means do but don't make up stuff or blurred bs I never actually said or what you assume I meant etc, call me on specific things I actually said and also do so in the knowledge that unlike you, I never claimed anything to be of fact since obviously I or anyone else, wouldn't have solid evidence so was merely stating how I felt about X, Y and Z and as such, is nothing more than my OPINION about it, rather than being a bold accusation or claiming "fact!" which you won't ever find me doing because obviously I'm not stupid enough to ever claim fact about something I don't have the facts on or solid evidence on. Problem with you is, unlike me you didn't just give an opinion based on generalized battles outcomes and MM, you actually claimed facts about it based on IT testing you performed across thousands of battles, facts about MM separate to anything WG openly divulge, and I called you out on it. I asked you to back it up and you never did. We can all make up stories bro. So now unless you can back it up, you're just looking stupid and obviously feeling embarrassed and salty because I kicked you right in your ego-balls. I get that. Btw I didn't ask you to back it up to make you feel embarrassed or look stupid, that's not my style. I did so because I and I'd imagine everyone else, is genuinely interested to see such an insight run by software so if you actually do come back with screenshots of graphs based on thousands of results and how you did your testing and what you tested for etc etc, that would be totally awesome obviously. 



jakub_czyli_ja #28 Posted 17 October 2020 - 04:17 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Conquest Member
  • 6584 battles
  • 9,622
  • [XII-2] XII-2
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postapartclassic, on 17 October 2020 - 04:01 AM, said:

Nope, that's also not true. You are describing a cognitive bias and finding a regularity where there is none. I talked about it too many times already - there is no meddling by script, literally nothing but MM trying to set up battles ASAP, but using imprecise criteria (not seeing specialization,

And just for the sake of clarity - you know that, because you have inspected MM code and audited whole process from said code compilation till deployment?

Block Quote

 and thinking all planes within a class are equal - as in LF equals HF, because both are fighters),

This isn't true.

From what I observed, 8 spots for fighters, at least 2 of each class are present. Situations that there is 1 plane of given class are very rare.

Without such 2+2+2 constraint, amounts of planes would depend on number of possible models, which means that for example for battle of tiers IX and X there would be totally different ratios (including Goblin, because 36 divides nicer than 35): 1/2 chances for LF (usually 4), 1/3 for multirole (usually 3 or 2) and 1/6th for HF (which gives expected value of whole 1), so your claim of class equality for MM seems invalid.

Block Quote

and then RNG of shots and bombs, of some bots crashing and some bots not crashing.

Yes, bots know player's input and react to it; yes, bots snipe better than humans. That's the extent of 'rigging' the game. Nothing more than that, nothing premeditated, nothing malignant. Because - cui bono? What for?....

WG admitted that bots vary in skills, so bot behavior may be a perfect way to alter the battle output. From the start, tuning some bots better than other, or from any moment of the battle, if it goes not as intended.

Tier VII HF being able to chase and catch tier VIII bomber (immediately after squall line), or tier VIII HF just passing enemy bomber at 2km distance - such tings don't seem normal and obvious.

What for? To enrage players and make them to play another battle, in which they think they'll finally beat the system. Only that it's also system' win.



apartclassic #29 Posted 17 October 2020 - 05:44 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Advanced Member
  • 26320 battles
  • 1,166
  • [UNIC] UNIC
  • Member since:
    01-21-2014

View Postjakub_czyli_ja, on 17 October 2020 - 04:17 PM, said:

And just for the sake of clarity - you know that, because you have inspected MM code and audited whole process from said code compilation till deployment?

This isn't true.

From what I observed, 8 spots for fighters, at least 2 of each class are present. Situations that there is 1 plane of given class are very rare.

Without such 2+2+2 constraint, amounts of planes would depend on number of possible models, which means that for example for battle of tiers IX and X there would be totally different ratios (including Goblin, because 36 divides nicer than 35): 1/2 chances for LF (usually 4), 1/3 for multirole (usually 3 or 2) and 1/6th for HF (which gives expected value of whole 1), so your claim of class equality for MM seems invalid.

WG admitted that bots vary in skills, so bot behavior may be a perfect way to alter the battle output. From the start, tuning some bots better than other, or from any moment of the battle, if it goes not as intended.

Tier VII HF being able to chase and catch tier VIII bomber (immediately after squall line), or tier VIII HF just passing enemy bomber at 2km distance - such tings don't seem normal and obvious.

What for? To enrage players and make them to play another battle, in which they think they'll finally beat the system. Only that it's also system' win.

 

As usual, you are nitpicking without real knowledge:

1) the actual formulae for MM is 4+8, four of PvE planes (that's how WG named bombers and GAA, throwing them into one cathegory), eight of PvP planes (fighters of all 3 classes in this, on 2 HF, 3 MRF, 3 LF usual composition).

https://worldofwarplanes.com/news/devblog_matchmaker_209/

 

2) WG did say bots vary in skill, and they also changed it to be based on period. All bots within a given period have the same level of skill, regardless of plane. Differences are evident in battles on the period breaking point. Anything else that is being claimed about bots is pure bollocks.


You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day

 


zen_monk_ #30 Posted 17 October 2020 - 06:50 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Alpha Tester
  • 10419 battles
  • 3,626
  • [__] __
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

Hi there, been away for a while and came back to find this heated thingy going on.

 

I have only two things to contribute to this discussion.

 

Someone said this while describing how the system is rigged:

 

 

It's always possible to win and lose regardless of how one sided it goes.

 

...and that made me smile, because that's exactly how it is. What it says on game being rigged / not being rigged, decide yourself.

 

And the second thing is: if I learned anything on this forum and ingame, it's this: always listen what Apartclassic says. Because out of all of us here he knows best how is, can explain, and by far most important, can demonstrate and prove.


stats were invented by Satan himself to suck the carefree fun out of gaming                            


apartclassic #31 Posted 17 October 2020 - 07:06 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Advanced Member
  • 26320 battles
  • 1,166
  • [UNIC] UNIC
  • Member since:
    01-21-2014

View Postzen_monk_, on 17 October 2020 - 06:50 PM, said:

Hi there, been away for a while and came back to find this heated thingy going on.

 

I have only two things to contribute to this discussion.

 

Someone said this while describing how the system is rigged:

 

 

...and that made me smile, because that's exactly how it is. What it says on game being rigged / not being rigged, decide yourself.

 

And the second thing is: if I learned anything on this forum and ingame, it's this: always listen what Apartclassic says. Because out of all of us here he knows best how is, can explain, and by far most important, can demonstrate and prove.

 


You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day

 


apartclassic #32 Posted 17 October 2020 - 10:06 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Advanced Member
  • 26320 battles
  • 1,166
  • [UNIC] UNIC
  • Member since:
    01-21-2014
I do call them bollocks, because it's bollocks. All of you are arguing based on your beliefs, not the facts and data provided both by community and WG. I refuse to participate in a religious discussion, I'd rather stick to reason. Of course you are free to believe what you want, just please don't preach it to others.

You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day

 


GonerNL #33 Posted 18 October 2020 - 12:49 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Advanced Member
  • 13108 battles
  • 2,910
  • Member since:
    09-02-2017

View Postzen_monk_, on 17 October 2020 - 07:50 PM, said:

always listen what Apartclassic says. 

 

When are you two getting married ??



dreambill #34 Posted 18 October 2020 - 02:58 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 5614 battles
  • 754
  • [GR-12] GR-12
  • Member since:
    07-25-2013
Well, the bot behavior is really inconsistent during battles, both over time and between teams and that is frustrating. If they are all equal in a battle as WG claims, then in a battle with uber sniper bots that one shots you from 1km there shouldn't be others who chase targets for 2-3 mins without EVER shoot at them although they are in range and position. I tent to believe that this is due to very poor programing (to say politely) but really leaves thoughts of game manipulation.

FotisK2000 #35 Posted 18 October 2020 - 04:32 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 2848 battles
  • 87
  • [GR-12] GR-12
  • Member since:
    07-28-2013
Since we are talking about bot behaviour I would like to mention my most recent experience. We were flying with a friend. The enemy team also had a platoon. The rest were bots of course. We did everything by the book. Caped ipmortant sectors, killed bots, killed platoon, recapt ground targets...Every single time we caped something and flew to next sector it was takken back by enemy bots within seconds. Every single time!!! Stats at the end of the game were as follows. My friend 20.000 personal points, I had 15.000 personal points. Enemy platoon were at the botom of the team 11 and 12 place with 4000 and 300o personal points. From position 1 to 10 all bots with scores like 8K,7K ,6K. Our bots were grazing in the nearby pasture. This happens so often it is not a joke anymore. Screen shot available if anybody would be interested. I know very well why this set up was introduced when 2.0 was initially launched a few years ago. Something should have been done to rectify but unfortunately no development team left and capable to do so.

TungstenHitman #36 Posted 18 October 2020 - 05:55 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 2260 battles
  • 167
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

View Postzen_monk_, on 17 October 2020 - 06:50 PM, said:

 

Someone said this while describing how the system is rigged:

 

 

...and that made me smile, because that's exactly how it is. What it says on game being rigged / not being rigged, decide yourself.

 

 

Think a little deeper about what I said and understand there is clearly no contradiction whatsoever. Understand I was outlining how consistently dubious the one sided team construction appears to be(at least in my opinion) which supposedly "ignores specialized aircraft status" is and how battle results are also heavily weighted and influenced by one teams bots being OP as F while the other teams bots are dumb as shhh, certainly not something I would say is "all equal" between both teams bots. Also understand that me then stating that if a player is amazingly good or horribly bad that he/she can win or lose either heavily weighted situation though the challenge is either much easier or much harder, and how me saying that is not contrary to my opinion about weighted team construction and uneven bot performances between teams.

 

View Postzen_monk_, on 17 October 2020 - 06:50 PM, said:

 

And the second thing is: if I learned anything on this forum and ingame, it's this: always listen what Apartclassic says. Because out of all of us here he knows best how is, can explain, and by far most important, can demonstrate and prove.

 

Yes indeed, such comments like "Anything else that is being claimed about bots is pure bollocks." highlights this beautifully. Who could argue or disagree with such a deep, factual and insightful comment like that. :D

 


Edited by TungstenHitman, 18 October 2020 - 05:57 PM.


houghtonbee #37 Posted 18 October 2020 - 07:10 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 6882 battles
  • 713
  • [BBMM] BBMM
  • Member since:
    06-23-2013

View PostFotisK2000, on 18 October 2020 - 05:32 PM, said:

Since we are talking about bot behaviour I would like to mention my most recent experience. We were flying with a friend. The enemy team also had a platoon. The rest were bots of course. We did everything by the book. Caped ipmortant sectors, killed bots, killed platoon, recapt ground targets...Every single time we caped something and flew to next sector it was takken back by enemy bots within seconds. Every single time!!! Stats at the end of the game were as follows. My friend 20.000 personal points, I had 15.000 personal points. Enemy platoon were at the botom of the team 11 and 12 place with 4000 and 300o personal points. From position 1 to 10 all bots with scores like 8K,7K ,6K. Our bots were grazing in the nearby pasture. This happens so often it is not a joke anymore. Screen shot available if anybody would be interested. I know very well why this set up was introduced when 2.0 was initially launched a few years ago. Something should have been done to rectify but unfortunately no development team left and capable to do so.

 

 

Tier 7/8 game earlier. Lasted 7 and a half minutes. A bot teammate MR ended with 0 pp. That means it either didnt fire its guns or didnt hit anything in the air or on the ground.

 

For 7+ minutes.

 

But all bots are balanced.

 

Righto.

 

 



Woolfie_aka_paca_chatban #38 Posted 18 October 2020 - 07:33 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Advanced Member
  • 9274 battles
  • 338
  • [BIZZ] BIZZ
  • Member since:
    01-24-2013

shot_094.jpgshot_093.jpg    sorry bad photos  but  left  one   you see the bombs  land    and damage buildings   

no damage in mini map 

second map  central buildings  down  and again no damage in mini map 

 

 


Edited by Woolfie_aka_paca_chatban, 18 October 2020 - 07:38 PM.


Vladinir_Shotitov #39 Posted 18 October 2020 - 08:00 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Conquest Member
  • 6911 battles
  • 228
  • [COSTS] COSTS
  • Member since:
    01-15-2014
I think that's a different snag, paca - I frequently get incorrect info on the mini-map, mainly an indication that there's a bogey or 3 (often completely static) which turns out to be just so much clutter/window/chaff.
For Demokan, this forum's Little Prince - GL & HF in your very own P38F

zen_monk_ #40 Posted 19 October 2020 - 10:52 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Alpha Tester
  • 10419 battles
  • 3,626
  • [__] __
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

 

OK, a serous question: would you prefer loses like this

 

 

or roflstomp victories?

 

I'd rather have games like this all day long instead of meh victories.

 

And the thing is: these games are possible to make for you, you can make them regardless of what MM throws at you.

 

 

 

Only if WG listen to "give the first from the losing team all as per victory" none of the stuff you point and counterpoint here wouldn't mean a thing.

 


Edited by zen_monk_, 19 October 2020 - 11:10 AM.

stats were invented by Satan himself to suck the carefree fun out of gaming                            





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users