Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Asking for this is legitimate, but you're making it sound like it is the case in BB3 - which is not out yet? Maybe this post was meant for the BB2 forum?
Also, I don't see why you're bringing up the classic "RNG is bad, dice cheat" into the same conversation. It has been established multiple times that this wasn't the case in BB1, isn't the case in BB2 and probably wont be in BB3. A double skull is a 1/36 chance, a quad skull is a 1/1296, and both will happen at this rate on average. Jumbling these two points together undermines your first point about the matchmaking, which is a good one.
Inducements are not designed to make the match even, just to vaguely ameliorate the imbalance. 300k TV is not that big of a TV difference - statistically there's only maybe a 5% deviation from even in terms of win rates at that level (the underdog wins 45% of the time, the overdog 55% of the time, across all the games that happen with that sort of TV difference).
Is it possible you're someone who routinely ascribes their failures to external forces, but takes eager credit for their successes? Blood Bowl is a game with a lot of randomness and is likely to stay that way.
I suspect your biggest issue is that you imagine that there are people in the match queue who are the same TV as you and such, but the system is refusing to match you together. In a given matching queue there aren't often more than 6 teams total, and often fewer. The system is attempting to give you the best match available - it isn't hiding better matches from you, there just aren't any at the time.
The matchmaking is a topic that has been raised by the community and we are definitely aiming at improving it with BB3. At this stage I can only tell you that BB2 ET BB3 will be different on this aspect. We will be able to give you more details in our future official communications that should please you.
If you guys came up with it on your own I'm pretty sure I'll be horrified by what you've settled on. If you cater to people's "feels" rather than the numbers then you're going to score short-term points with the dimmer demographic in the community, but since it's not actually addressing the core issues, it'll show its half-assery over time, and those same dim people will turn on you and invent a new set of imagined reasons (other than the obvious core issues) that things are broken.
When human-vs-human games aren't fair and balanced people will cry foul.. the solution is to actually make them balanced and fair. Not their imagined version of that which is "I win more games than I lose" which is very obviously unsustainable (everybody can't win more than they lose.. victory is a zero-sum game and there are two players in every match).
If you cater exclusively to the tabletop people who will demand that you NOT make matches balanced (specifically so they can win more than they lose) then you'll fail to capture other demographics successfully, resulting in a significantly smaller playerbase which will make the matchmaking even harder to do (as is the case now) since you can't match people with people who aren't there to be matched with.
Nacon (formerly BigBen) is the name of the company that bought Cyanide, so you're very likely seeing a community manager not an actual developer of the game.
Well yes indeed but still considering Focus literally didn't seem to care one iota (even their community managers) just seeing someone asking for interaction is a shock.
There is already a 500 TV difference maximum in place for no other reason than people crying about it way-back-when. Higher TV teams absolutely do want to be matched with lower TV teams because it gives them a distinct advantage... but lower TV teams rarely enjoy it as much. The solution would be to make the handicapping system actually balance the match, but since the BBRC said they didn't design it to do that, they've never bothered to rectify that because they don't think it needs rectification.
There have been community managers who were quite involved and who actually did good work for the community... but also plenty of dead weight. I'd be very slow to assume you're seeing the former just because they've made a few comments - it's only when they do more than just toss out a quip or two, and actually display community engagement and a willingness to address issues and complaints in an intelligent manner that you can really say that thinks are looking up.
It's the amount of fishing that goes on is stupid and yes if someone teamm is 500k tv higher i'd rather just not play than the game say yeah this might help
We need to know now, i've bought this game and been an avid fans for many years but coming back from a 2 year break i'm understanding why the ♥♥♥♥ i gave this game up a gain.
So many kills teams out there with 20-4-50 and all they play to do is kill you teams forget the ball they only score if nothing left to do.
these type of pricks will foul your best player even if you keep all your players on the ground as there is nothing u can do each turn but get smashed each time u dare stand up.
Chaos Dwarves and Nurgle are the main offenders. This no ageing rule just plays into there living forever ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and playing only to kill. ageing should not be optional. this would force teams to evolve and keep changing.
So many times i see a game where i'm 1500 tv and the other team is 1800tv but they have several players with 100+ spp each more spp than your entire team combined.
these players have very foul tempers abuse you for being a lucker if you just so happen to hurt any of there players.
Game is which toxic to be truthful.
Games needs a reporting system to send in reports of abuse cause you had a tiny bit of luck and these kill teams will instantly concede when 1 player is removed.
the 5 concede league is a joke for anyone not living in a major city as even if you get the tinest of net connection issue it thinks you concede.
Again that league is plagued by the TV problem, day 3 into the new season and 1st game with a new team 990k vs 1400, yeah so much fun.
If you can't fix the Tv issue match up then it's best to just play table top events where all tvs are equal and i know if my dice is rolling constant ♥♥♥♥♥♥ 1's i can toss it in the bin and get a new dice.
You rng for dice rolls is ♥♥♥♥♥♥.
I see so many times 1 player doing everything me 1st action doubnle skulls reroll double skulls they then get a completel turn, my 1sdt action 2+ dodge fail reroll fail
if thats my lack of playing ability why do i have over a 65% win ratio in over 3000 games. If i was half my playing ability i have i'd lose almost all of them.
My game plans only needs pushes, everything else is a bonus. but hey all those times i roll that 1d block as my last action for the turn for my orcs is a skull, gfi for orcs is 75% of the time a 1.
Yet i can get a ko almost every hit with my necro werewolves if i wait till the timer says 11 seconds to decide which square to push them, tried the same thing with a frenzy orc blizter and yup if i pick the square at 11 seconds he breaks av all the time. Explain how thats rng?
Also gfi if you do both in the 1 movement that always fail, everyone knows cause of the rng you pick 1 gfi wait then confirm, then wait, picckm the gfi then confirm again as if you pick both too quickly it always comes up 1.
How exactly is that rng instead of some issue with the game that hasn't been addressed in over 4 years?
If you like i can give a full list of all the issue with this game using the same rule set you don't get on table top due to the poor rng of this game. i'd hammer my block dice if they rolled like this in real life
To get a 1-1 draw for them was an acheievement
Did you even think before you wrote this? I want my team to be famous by playing lower skilled no challenge teams and that will make me famous amongst all the teams. Did u even listen to that?
Read some BB fluff, it's about how often a teams wins or such, the number of trophies and cups they won. ie Chaos cup, Blood Weiser Cup etc.
How exactly does a team who won't play other equal rating teams going for the championships earn a reuptation as anything but a coward, oh i got a 0-10-30 record but hey my tv's 2500 cause i've caused almost every team to face me to concede.
Grow up people like you why BB3 is changing
Their point was not 'everybody' can win more than they lose. For every 70/30 win rate player there is a 30/70 loss rate player (in very broad simplistic terms) the point they were making was the loudest complainers about tv difference and 'fairness' will likely never be happy unless the system in place helps them win.
You couldn't have a 0-10-30 record if everyone conceded against you.
The world of evidence and data - one that has involved hundreds of thousands of matches over more than a decade. You could play sequential games without sleeping for the rest of your life and you still wouldn't have an amount of experience that compares to the amount of data we have on the game.
Everything in Blood Bowl is a "random chance ability" including, but not limited to, picking up the ball, blocking other players, running, etc. The issue you have is not randomness (or if it is just delete the game and move on) it's limited-use abilities.
As for your dice complaints, they just make you look stupid. We've used statistical analysis (that's actual real-world mathematics for studying phenomena) to examine the rolls across many, many matches and there is no sign of bias or real patterns or anything. If you imagine your intuition is superior to analysis you're a fool, or possibly have superpowers and should stop playing games and go make billions using them.
Your preferences are irrelevant. As stated, at the 500 TV difference mark the average win rate for the underdog is 40%. In a perfectly balanced system that can't get higher than 50%. Because we know that the average win rates even at the highest TV differences are not too bad, the whininess of some coaches is considerably less important than ensuring that there are timely matches to be had.
Even if the maximum TV difference were reduced, someone would complain about that being too much. I've seen people complain that 100 is too big a difference! People generally just don't want to play at a disadvantage but are eager to play at an advantage, which is an impossible thing to accomplish for everyone when both sides of the match are human players.
You absolutely suck at quoting, since you ascribed my words to Nacon, your words to me, and so on. If you can't puzzle out how to quote then stop trying and just put the person's name at the head of your reply.
Your tedious, self-lionizing story aside, yes there are people with 70% win rates, and people with 30% win rates... guess which ones complain and which ones ragequit. Nobody has suggested that the current system is "balanced", and indeed it is difficult to balance a game when there is progressive, mechanical development among its participants that is expected to improve their performance. There's also a loud subset of the playerbase that demands it NOT be balanced, even though we know ways to do so.