24 replies to this topic

[Hagen Zwosta]

dubstep albatross, on 13 February 2025 - 10:08 PM, said:

If I may ask, what tier are you in?

Tier 2. I am a rather new player, only a good year or so. Not thousands and thousands of games.

[dubstep albatross]

Hagen Zwosta, on 09 February 2025 - 02:20 AM, said:

First 2 games today;

2-12 with me getting an = they even had one disco.
1-12 with me getting an ^

Hagen Zwosta, on 15 February 2025 - 12:16 AM, said:

Tier 2. I am a rather new player, only a good year or so. Not thousands and thousands of games.

Overall, about 15% of the matches turned out 12-2 (or less), and just about 1.5% (52) were the start of a streak (two or more in a row). The longest streak was four in a row, happening only once. I am counting 12-2 and 2-12 as they are the same outcome, only different being which side of that ratio I was involved with.

Events with low probabilities still happen. How often do you run into back-to-back 12-2 (or less) situations? I do not have a lot of data for Tier 2, so my data may not be representative. With that said, it is about 2%.

It should be said that because it is all my data, I am the true constant, and if I have any effect on matches in a consistent way, then my data could (and would likely) be biased. I am not only an observer, but a participant, and hopefully a (positive) contributor. If, for example, I tend to get more than the average number of kills per match when playing on a team that was defeated, then it could shift the distribution of outcomes. Put another way, if I get more than 1/12th of the kills in matches where my team was defeated, then it suggests I have an outsized contribution (to the raw kill count) and I could potentially see less 12-2 (or less) outcomes.

[SafeScanner]

Can i ask you all about Quaility of those matches ie were some of them entertaining i find some of them can be good when the loosing side puts up a good fight instead of just quiting/giving up

[dubstep albatross]

SafeScanner, on 16 February 2025 - 11:58 PM, said:

Can i ask you all about Quaility of those matches ie were some of them entertaining i find some of them can be good when the loosing side puts up a good fight instead of just quiting/giving up

I actually find that many 12-3, 12-4 matches play out just fine. Sometimes teams are trading well and one just secures more kills than the other. There are so many variables that no teams are evenly matched, even if the skills of the players are balanced perfectly. There is also a stochastic element to how matches play out.

Teams that win typically see at least 3000 damage applied to the defeated team, with the average being just under 5000. Globally, average damage per kill is about 300. The damage done by a defeated team trends up with kill count, with 12-0 averaging at about 2500. 75% of those are between 1500 and 3500.

I think 12-0 matches are usually unfun for both sides, though probably the losing side feels it more keenly. I feel players tend to attribute these outcomes to the matchmaker. I suppose that can be true, but I also think that sometimes one team just outplays the other and/or just gets lucky. Like a vast majority of Ace of Spade achievements: it really is not about the skill of one player, but the collective results of many factors and good timing. To get an Ace one generally needs one's own team to be less effective, certainly the other team to be less effective, and good luck. I think the same is generally true with 12-0 matches.

12-1 matches are probably effectively the same as 12-0. I think 12-2 is a borderline area where they probably lean towards the 12-0/12-1 side, but could just be a form of 12-3/12-4. I have spent some time look at the data and there are matches where the defeated team did a considerable amount of damage, yet failed to secure kills. There is a very different feel to a match where the defeated team does low overall damage.

All in all, I feel that people focus on the kill counts too much. The very nature of the game means that there will generally be a snowball effect as one team's ability to apply effective damage gets reduced, plus the overall player tendency to operate in packs (even two-on-one is highly asymmetrical). The maps are small enough, weapons have enough range, and mechs are mobile enough that nobody is really too far from anyone else.

[Strelok7]

SafeScanner, on 16 February 2025 - 11:58 PM, said:

Can i ask you all about Quaility of those matches ie were some of them entertaining i find some of them can be good when the loosing side puts up a good fight instead of just quiting/giving up

More often than not, the quality is mediocre. Typical scenario for "those kind" of matches:

• Usually starts off with a whole squad just charging-in (thinking they gonna ambush someone) ...and instead.... they get totally obliterated. (-4).

• Then, four of your teammates decide it is an excellent idea to chase a squirrel; after all, there are "more of us then him". The squirrel somehow manages to kill one of them and runs off to regroup with the reds. One teammate gets lost. One regroups, One is still chasing something. (-4, they just get picked off by reds in the end).

• Meanwhile. The main group of four was carrying the dignity. They were fighting the entirety of team red until they ran out of ammo and armor. (-4).

• The end!

Next match: different names, same red and white "end of the round" board.

Matchmaker is unable to effectively shuffle. You just have to log off and try a different time slot.