It's not just the bad crit in attack vs defense, butt it's also the unbalanced drop rates of Locutus, Guinan and now Caretaker. Players with 20'000 rounds eventually getting Locutus thanks to the achievement threshold, still waiting for a Guinan or a Caretaker to ever drop from the Gauntlet ... I'm not the only one.
"Everything about the Jem'Hadar is lethal!" - Eris (ST-DS9 Episode 2x26 "The Jem'Hadar")
Yes, you are missing the simple fact that displayed numbers means nothing to DB. In other words you can't beat (R)elentless and (N)otorious Mirror (G)argantua.
Of course it has to be from the mirror universe.
+1 Awesome
I seem to be getting worse and worse in the Gauntlet of late, I forever face walls of Surak, or Mirror Picard, or Guinan or Mirror Phlox, of which I often have them as well, but in general I've been finding more often than not the underdog on the stats front almost always wins, especially on the mirror matches. I've keep thinking I should go in as the underdog, although those stats often draw me in to what should be easy wins, but then the opponent pulls out between 2 and 6 critical hits to take the win, with some wins being less than 20, that they hit right on the last stat match!
Another day another miracle.
5% vs 5%
I love when people say. "Well in X number of rounds this might happens".
Sure, no problem. The problem is, where are my miracle wins every damn round? Because nothing like that ever happened in more than 5k rounds in my favor.
Another day another miracle.
5% vs 5%
I love when people say. "Well in X number of rounds this might happens".
Sure, no problem. The problem is, where are my miracle wins every damn round? Because nothing like that ever happened in more than 5k rounds in my favor.
I agree with you in principle... but in order to have miracle wins, you have to choose those matches in the first place. If you regularly optimize your matches to take a battle that favors your victory, you're probably not going to experience a miracle win.
However, if you stop caring and just throw your crew out without much hope, miracle wins do sometimes happen. Certainly not as often as these kind of bad beats, but again that's partially due to the matches a player selects.
That said, the crit system is frequently unbelievable in it's results. Current gauntlet with a 65% crit Mariachi Q crits 0/3 to 5% crit non-FE Caretaker crits 2/3. Sure, it's a possible result. Sure I experience this for defenders more often partially because of match selection bias. But I also do throw-away matches around 40% of the time and don't see low odds wins anywhere in the same neighborhood of frequency of low odds losses.
There's a lot of cognitive bias that goes into shaping perceptions of the Gauntlet. But even after attempting to correct for bias, it's pretty obvious that many elements of the system are rigged against the player in order to encourage spending... One could almost say that is the point of this whole game?
Another day another miracle.
5% vs 5%
I love when people say. "Well in X number of rounds this might happens".
Sure, no problem. The problem is, where are my miracle wins every damn round? Because nothing like that ever happened in more than 5k rounds in my favor.
I agree with you in principle... but in order to have miracle wins, you have to choose those matches in the first place. If you regularly optimize your matches to take a battle that favors your victory, you're probably not going to experience a miracle win.
However, if you stop caring and just throw your crew out without much hope, miracle wins do sometimes happen. Certainly not as often as these kind of bad beats, but again that's partially due to the matches a player selects.
That said, the crit system is frequently unbelievable in it's results. Current gauntlet with a 65% crit Mariachi Q crits 0/3 to 5% crit non-FE Caretaker crits 2/3. Sure, it's a possible result. Sure I experience this for defenders more often partially because of match selection bias. But I also do throw-away matches around 40% of the time and don't see low odds wins anywhere in the same neighborhood of frequency of low odds losses.
There's a lot of cognitive bias that goes into shaping perceptions of the Gauntlet. But even after attempting to correct for bias, it's pretty obvious that many elements of the system are rigged against the player in order to encourage spending... One could almost say that is the point of this whole game?
The thing is if with optimized choices things like that happen, imagine going suicidal? And going optimally would lead to 'massacres' from time to time, like my Faith Garland ROFLSTOMPING that Gowron with 3-4 crits. Now ask me if I ever saw that happening?
I had my fair share of 'suicidal' rounds when my crew was very limited and poor and I never saw anything like that.
Another day another miracle.
5% vs 5%
I love when people say. "Well in X number of rounds this might happens".
Sure, no problem. The problem is, where are my miracle wins every damn round? Because nothing like that ever happened in more than 5k rounds in my favor.
I agree with you in principle... but in order to have miracle wins, you have to choose those matches in the first place. If you regularly optimize your matches to take a battle that favors your victory, you're probably not going to experience a miracle win.
However, if you stop caring and just throw your crew out without much hope, miracle wins do sometimes happen. Certainly not as often as these kind of bad beats, but again that's partially due to the matches a player selects.
That said, the crit system is frequently unbelievable in it's results. Current gauntlet with a 65% crit Mariachi Q crits 0/3 to 5% crit non-FE Caretaker crits 2/3. Sure, it's a possible result. Sure I experience this for defenders more often partially because of match selection bias. But I also do throw-away matches around 40% of the time and don't see low odds wins anywhere in the same neighborhood of frequency of low odds losses.
There's a lot of cognitive bias that goes into shaping perceptions of the Gauntlet. But even after attempting to correct for bias, it's pretty obvious that many elements of the system are rigged against the player in order to encourage spending... One could almost say that is the point of this whole game?
The thing is if with optimized choices things like that happen, imagine going suicidal? And going optimally would lead to 'massacres' from time to time, like my Faith Garland ROFLSTOMPING that Gowron with 3-4 crits. Now ask me if I ever saw that happening?
I had my fair share of 'suicidal' rounds when my crew was very limited and poor and I never saw anything like that.
We're in general agreement that DB has a very heavy thumb on the scale when it comes to aspects of Gauntlet, the crit system in particular in this instance.
My point of contention is that players are likely to experience more bad beats than miracle wins due to optimizing for wins instead of playing with, shall I say, less attachment. If you select for wins and expect to win, you're probably going to make note of and feel losses much more significantly. Think of it as Data's first strategma match vs Kolrami compared to Data's strategma rematch vs. Kolrami, if you will.
I'm likely doing more throw-away battles than the average player, and that's because I don't see a significant net gain to optimizing matches for streak rewards or trophies. A fair amount of my 40% of throwaway matches are hopeless, but not all of them are.
Top 10 finishes and streaks of 30+ never got me a Locutus, so if gauntlet exclusive characters or high value equipment is your thing, I question if that's really optimizing the playing experience. As I've said elsewhere, I will occasionally chase a beatable opponent for matches 3, 6, 9, and 12, but mostly I want the certainty of merits not the likelihood of blue trainers.
All I can tell you is that I have personally seen a number of miracle wins when I had no business winning a match, even for matches that reward streak boxes (though this is significantly more rare). Granted, they are still a surprise to me when they happen. I hate to be that "believe me" drone, but I don't generally bother with screenshoting the game, so I guess there's that. Next one I see though, I'll try to remember to screenshot, even if it is a generally isolated, largely meaningless data point.
Another day another miracle.
5% vs 5%
I love when people say. "Well in X number of rounds this might happens".
Sure, no problem. The problem is, where are my miracle wins every damn round? Because nothing like that ever happened in more than 5k rounds in my favor.
I agree with you in principle... but in order to have miracle wins, you have to choose those matches in the first place. If you regularly optimize your matches to take a battle that favors your victory, you're probably not going to experience a miracle win.
However, if you stop caring and just throw your crew out without much hope, miracle wins do sometimes happen. Certainly not as often as these kind of bad beats, but again that's partially due to the matches a player selects.
That said, the crit system is frequently unbelievable in it's results. Current gauntlet with a 65% crit Mariachi Q crits 0/3 to 5% crit non-FE Caretaker crits 2/3. Sure, it's a possible result. Sure I experience this for defenders more often partially because of match selection bias. But I also do throw-away matches around 40% of the time and don't see low odds wins anywhere in the same neighborhood of frequency of low odds losses.
There's a lot of cognitive bias that goes into shaping perceptions of the Gauntlet. But even after attempting to correct for bias, it's pretty obvious that many elements of the system are rigged against the player in order to encourage spending... One could almost say that is the point of this whole game?
The thing is if with optimized choices things like that happen, imagine going suicidal? And going optimally would lead to 'massacres' from time to time, like my Faith Garland ROFLSTOMPING that Gowron with 3-4 crits. Now ask me if I ever saw that happening?
I had my fair share of 'suicidal' rounds when my crew was very limited and poor and I never saw anything like that.
We're in general agreement that DB has a very heavy thumb on the scale when it comes to aspects of Gauntlet, the crit system in particular in this instance.
My point of contention is that players are likely to experience more bad beats than miracle wins due to optimizing for wins instead of playing with, shall I say, less attachment. If you select for wins and expect to win, you're probably going to make note of and feel losses much more significantly. Think of it as Data's first strategma match vs Kolrami compared to Data's strategma rematch vs. Kolrami, if you will.
I'm likely doing more throw-away battles than the average player, and that's because I don't see a significant net gain to optimizing matches for streak rewards or trophies. A fair amount of my 40% of throwaway matches are hopeless, but not all of them are.
Top 10 finishes and streaks of 30+ never got me a Locutus, so if gauntlet exclusive characters or high value equipment is your thing, I question if that's really optimizing the playing experience. As I've said elsewhere, I will occasionally chase a beatable opponent for matches 3, 6, 9, and 12, but mostly I want the certainty of merits not the likelihood of blue trainers.
All I can tell you is that I have personally seen a number of miracle wins when I had no business winning a match, even for matches that reward streak boxes (though this is significantly more rare). Granted, they are still a surprise to me when they happen. I hate to be that "believe me" drone, but I don't generally bother with screenshoting the game, so I guess there's that. Next one I see though, I'll try to remember to screenshot, even if it is a generally isolated, largely meaningless data point.
Speaking of not taking screenshots, I saw a Mariachi Q with no matching skills today and matched up my own for fun. I won 5-4 scoring a 2 on the first roll. Brought a smile to my face. 😀
Gauntlet features walls of Mirror Picards, Caretakers, Suraks, Guinans, and a few other gauntlet monsters. Usually when going up against the same card the results are highly different thanks to RNG. Gauntlet is more of a coin toss most of the time. It's a broken system.
Another day another miracle.
5% vs 5%
I love when people say. "Well in X number of rounds this might happens".
Sure, no problem. The problem is, where are my miracle wins every damn round? Because nothing like that ever happened in more than 5k rounds in my favor.
I agree with you in principle... but in order to have miracle wins, you have to choose those matches in the first place. If you regularly optimize your matches to take a battle that favors your victory, you're probably not going to experience a miracle win.
However, if you stop caring and just throw your crew out without much hope, miracle wins do sometimes happen. Certainly not as often as these kind of bad beats, but again that's partially due to the matches a player selects.
That said, the crit system is frequently unbelievable in it's results. Current gauntlet with a 65% crit Mariachi Q crits 0/3 to 5% crit non-FE Caretaker crits 2/3. Sure, it's a possible result. Sure I experience this for defenders more often partially because of match selection bias. But I also do throw-away matches around 40% of the time and don't see low odds wins anywhere in the same neighborhood of frequency of low odds losses.
There's a lot of cognitive bias that goes into shaping perceptions of the Gauntlet. But even after attempting to correct for bias, it's pretty obvious that many elements of the system are rigged against the player in order to encourage spending... One could almost say that is the point of this whole game?
The thing is if with optimized choices things like that happen, imagine going suicidal? And going optimally would lead to 'massacres' from time to time, like my Faith Garland ROFLSTOMPING that Gowron with 3-4 crits. Now ask me if I ever saw that happening?
I had my fair share of 'suicidal' rounds when my crew was very limited and poor and I never saw anything like that.
We're in general agreement that DB has a very heavy thumb on the scale when it comes to aspects of Gauntlet, the crit system in particular in this instance.
My point of contention is that players are likely to experience more bad beats than miracle wins due to optimizing for wins instead of playing with, shall I say, less attachment. If you select for wins and expect to win, you're probably going to make note of and feel losses much more significantly. Think of it as Data's first strategma match vs Kolrami compared to Data's strategma rematch vs. Kolrami, if you will.
I'm likely doing more throw-away battles than the average player, and that's because I don't see a significant net gain to optimizing matches for streak rewards or trophies. A fair amount of my 40% of throwaway matches are hopeless, but not all of them are.
Top 10 finishes and streaks of 30+ never got me a Locutus, so if gauntlet exclusive characters or high value equipment is your thing, I question if that's really optimizing the playing experience. As I've said elsewhere, I will occasionally chase a beatable opponent for matches 3, 6, 9, and 12, but mostly I want the certainty of merits not the likelihood of blue trainers.
All I can tell you is that I have personally seen a number of miracle wins when I had no business winning a match, even for matches that reward streak boxes (though this is significantly more rare). Granted, they are still a surprise to me when they happen. I hate to be that "believe me" drone, but I don't generally bother with screenshoting the game, so I guess there's that. Next one I see though, I'll try to remember to screenshot, even if it is a generally isolated, largely meaningless data point.
But if the system was truly 'blind' to who is doing what no matter if you are going suicidal or not you should experience the same amount of crits out of the blue as those defenders. That is the point.
A lot of times, like now with all those Qs making impossible to win DIP+SEC I simply play to gain rounds towards the achievement, my FE Duelist Yar, for example, never did what that Gowron did,now or in past rounds which I simply played her against really hard odds to progress in the achievement.
Another day another miracle.
5% vs 5%
I love when people say. "Well in X number of rounds this might happens".
Sure, no problem. The problem is, where are my miracle wins every damn round? Because nothing like that ever happened in more than 5k rounds in my favor.
I agree with you in principle... but in order to have miracle wins, you have to choose those matches in the first place. If you regularly optimize your matches to take a battle that favors your victory, you're probably not going to experience a miracle win.
However, if you stop caring and just throw your crew out without much hope, miracle wins do sometimes happen. Certainly not as often as these kind of bad beats, but again that's partially due to the matches a player selects.
That said, the crit system is frequently unbelievable in it's results. Current gauntlet with a 65% crit Mariachi Q crits 0/3 to 5% crit non-FE Caretaker crits 2/3. Sure, it's a possible result. Sure I experience this for defenders more often partially because of match selection bias. But I also do throw-away matches around 40% of the time and don't see low odds wins anywhere in the same neighborhood of frequency of low odds losses.
There's a lot of cognitive bias that goes into shaping perceptions of the Gauntlet. But even after attempting to correct for bias, it's pretty obvious that many elements of the system are rigged against the player in order to encourage spending... One could almost say that is the point of this whole game?
The thing is if with optimized choices things like that happen, imagine going suicidal? And going optimally would lead to 'massacres' from time to time, like my Faith Garland ROFLSTOMPING that Gowron with 3-4 crits. Now ask me if I ever saw that happening?
I had my fair share of 'suicidal' rounds when my crew was very limited and poor and I never saw anything like that.
We're in general agreement that DB has a very heavy thumb on the scale when it comes to aspects of Gauntlet, the crit system in particular in this instance.
My point of contention is that players are likely to experience more bad beats than miracle wins due to optimizing for wins instead of playing with, shall I say, less attachment. If you select for wins and expect to win, you're probably going to make note of and feel losses much more significantly. Think of it as Data's first strategma match vs Kolrami compared to Data's strategma rematch vs. Kolrami, if you will.
I'm likely doing more throw-away battles than the average player, and that's because I don't see a significant net gain to optimizing matches for streak rewards or trophies. A fair amount of my 40% of throwaway matches are hopeless, but not all of them are.
Top 10 finishes and streaks of 30+ never got me a Locutus, so if gauntlet exclusive characters or high value equipment is your thing, I question if that's really optimizing the playing experience. As I've said elsewhere, I will occasionally chase a beatable opponent for matches 3, 6, 9, and 12, but mostly I want the certainty of merits not the likelihood of blue trainers.
All I can tell you is that I have personally seen a number of miracle wins when I had no business winning a match, even for matches that reward streak boxes (though this is significantly more rare). Granted, they are still a surprise to me when they happen. I hate to be that "believe me" drone, but I don't generally bother with screenshoting the game, so I guess there's that. Next one I see though, I'll try to remember to screenshot, even if it is a generally isolated, largely meaningless data point.
But if the system was truly 'blind' to who is doing what no matter if you are going suicidal or not you should experience the same amount of crits out of the blue as those defenders. That is the point.
A lot of times, like now with all those Qs making impossible to win DIP+SEC I simply play to gain rounds towards the achievement, my FE Duelist Yar, for example, never did what that Gowron did,now or in past rounds which I simply played her against really hard odds to progress in the achievement.
If you think its truly rigged against you why don't you do actual data collection instead of posting random screen shots when the Gauntlet doesn't go your way.
If you try to pull wins out of your **tsk tsk**, you will sometimes do just that but that only happens when you don't care or are just desperate.
I wasn't expecting Doc Crusher with 2 Fatigue levels and a 25% crit chance to win against Q's 65%. I just cheerfully collected my extra gauntlet round and carried on.
Another day another miracle.
5% vs 5%
I love when people say. "Well in X number of rounds this might happens".
Sure, no problem. The problem is, where are my miracle wins every damn round? Because nothing like that ever happened in more than 5k rounds in my favor.
I agree with you in principle... but in order to have miracle wins, you have to choose those matches in the first place. If you regularly optimize your matches to take a battle that favors your victory, you're probably not going to experience a miracle win.
However, if you stop caring and just throw your crew out without much hope, miracle wins do sometimes happen. Certainly not as often as these kind of bad beats, but again that's partially due to the matches a player selects.
That said, the crit system is frequently unbelievable in it's results. Current gauntlet with a 65% crit Mariachi Q crits 0/3 to 5% crit non-FE Caretaker crits 2/3. Sure, it's a possible result. Sure I experience this for defenders more often partially because of match selection bias. But I also do throw-away matches around 40% of the time and don't see low odds wins anywhere in the same neighborhood of frequency of low odds losses.
There's a lot of cognitive bias that goes into shaping perceptions of the Gauntlet. But even after attempting to correct for bias, it's pretty obvious that many elements of the system are rigged against the player in order to encourage spending... One could almost say that is the point of this whole game?
The thing is if with optimized choices things like that happen, imagine going suicidal? And going optimally would lead to 'massacres' from time to time, like my Faith Garland ROFLSTOMPING that Gowron with 3-4 crits. Now ask me if I ever saw that happening?
I had my fair share of 'suicidal' rounds when my crew was very limited and poor and I never saw anything like that.
We're in general agreement that DB has a very heavy thumb on the scale when it comes to aspects of Gauntlet, the crit system in particular in this instance.
My point of contention is that players are likely to experience more bad beats than miracle wins due to optimizing for wins instead of playing with, shall I say, less attachment. If you select for wins and expect to win, you're probably going to make note of and feel losses much more significantly. Think of it as Data's first strategma match vs Kolrami compared to Data's strategma rematch vs. Kolrami, if you will.
I'm likely doing more throw-away battles than the average player, and that's because I don't see a significant net gain to optimizing matches for streak rewards or trophies. A fair amount of my 40% of throwaway matches are hopeless, but not all of them are.
Top 10 finishes and streaks of 30+ never got me a Locutus, so if gauntlet exclusive characters or high value equipment is your thing, I question if that's really optimizing the playing experience. As I've said elsewhere, I will occasionally chase a beatable opponent for matches 3, 6, 9, and 12, but mostly I want the certainty of merits not the likelihood of blue trainers.
All I can tell you is that I have personally seen a number of miracle wins when I had no business winning a match, even for matches that reward streak boxes (though this is significantly more rare). Granted, they are still a surprise to me when they happen. I hate to be that "believe me" drone, but I don't generally bother with screenshoting the game, so I guess there's that. Next one I see though, I'll try to remember to screenshot, even if it is a generally isolated, largely meaningless data point.
But if the system was truly 'blind' to who is doing what no matter if you are going suicidal or not you should experience the same amount of crits out of the blue as those defenders. That is the point.
A lot of times, like now with all those Qs making impossible to win DIP+SEC I simply play to gain rounds towards the achievement, my FE Duelist Yar, for example, never did what that Gowron did,now or in past rounds which I simply played her against really hard odds to progress in the achievement.
If you think its truly rigged against you why don't you do actual data collection instead of posting random screen shots when the Gauntlet doesn't go your way.
If you try to pull wins out of your *Vegan Poutine*, you will sometimes do just that but that only happens when you don't care or are just desperate.
I wasn't expecting Doc Crusher with 2 Fatigue levels and a 25% crit chance to win against Q's 65%. I just cheerfully collected my extra gauntlet round and carried on.
Because someone already did and found a bias toward the defenders. But here people are too concerned about ignoring that, called 'mild' and give a lot of excuses for the devs instead to claim a more transparent system. Especially because involves money. But then people said on my Twitter that I joined the 'hate wagon' when I called SW:BF2 pay to win right after the end of the beta and months later I still can't stop laughing on those guys. The little concern people have about the fairness of a game, even more, when real money is involved is fascinating, to say the least.
And what is wrong with my random ss? The gauntlet is random as well, as your ss demonstrated.
Another day another miracle.
5% vs 5%
I love when people say. "Well in X number of rounds this might happens".
Sure, no problem. The problem is, where are my miracle wins every damn round? Because nothing like that ever happened in more than 5k rounds in my favor.
I agree with you in principle... but in order to have miracle wins, you have to choose those matches in the first place. If you regularly optimize your matches to take a battle that favors your victory, you're probably not going to experience a miracle win.
However, if you stop caring and just throw your crew out without much hope, miracle wins do sometimes happen. Certainly not as often as these kind of bad beats, but again that's partially due to the matches a player selects.
That said, the crit system is frequently unbelievable in it's results. Current gauntlet with a 65% crit Mariachi Q crits 0/3 to 5% crit non-FE Caretaker crits 2/3. Sure, it's a possible result. Sure I experience this for defenders more often partially because of match selection bias. But I also do throw-away matches around 40% of the time and don't see low odds wins anywhere in the same neighborhood of frequency of low odds losses.
There's a lot of cognitive bias that goes into shaping perceptions of the Gauntlet. But even after attempting to correct for bias, it's pretty obvious that many elements of the system are rigged against the player in order to encourage spending... One could almost say that is the point of this whole game?
The thing is if with optimized choices things like that happen, imagine going suicidal? And going optimally would lead to 'massacres' from time to time, like my Faith Garland ROFLSTOMPING that Gowron with 3-4 crits. Now ask me if I ever saw that happening?
I had my fair share of 'suicidal' rounds when my crew was very limited and poor and I never saw anything like that.
We're in general agreement that DB has a very heavy thumb on the scale when it comes to aspects of Gauntlet, the crit system in particular in this instance.
My point of contention is that players are likely to experience more bad beats than miracle wins due to optimizing for wins instead of playing with, shall I say, less attachment. If you select for wins and expect to win, you're probably going to make note of and feel losses much more significantly. Think of it as Data's first strategma match vs Kolrami compared to Data's strategma rematch vs. Kolrami, if you will.
I'm likely doing more throw-away battles than the average player, and that's because I don't see a significant net gain to optimizing matches for streak rewards or trophies. A fair amount of my 40% of throwaway matches are hopeless, but not all of them are.
Top 10 finishes and streaks of 30+ never got me a Locutus, so if gauntlet exclusive characters or high value equipment is your thing, I question if that's really optimizing the playing experience. As I've said elsewhere, I will occasionally chase a beatable opponent for matches 3, 6, 9, and 12, but mostly I want the certainty of merits not the likelihood of blue trainers.
All I can tell you is that I have personally seen a number of miracle wins when I had no business winning a match, even for matches that reward streak boxes (though this is significantly more rare). Granted, they are still a surprise to me when they happen. I hate to be that "believe me" drone, but I don't generally bother with screenshoting the game, so I guess there's that. Next one I see though, I'll try to remember to screenshot, even if it is a generally isolated, largely meaningless data point.
But if the system was truly 'blind' to who is doing what no matter if you are going suicidal or not you should experience the same amount of crits out of the blue as those defenders. That is the point.
A lot of times, like now with all those Qs making impossible to win DIP+SEC I simply play to gain rounds towards the achievement, my FE Duelist Yar, for example, never did what that Gowron did,now or in past rounds which I simply played her against really hard odds to progress in the achievement.
If you think its truly rigged against you why don't you do actual data collection instead of posting random screen shots when the Gauntlet doesn't go your way.
If you try to pull wins out of your *Vegan Poutine*, you will sometimes do just that but that only happens when you don't care or are just desperate.
I wasn't expecting Doc Crusher with 2 Fatigue levels and a 25% crit chance to win against Q's 65%. I just cheerfully collected my extra gauntlet round and carried on.
Because someone already did and found a bias toward the defenders. But here people are too concern in ignore that, called 'mild' and give a lot of excuses for the devs instead to claim a more transparent system. Especially because involves money. But then people said on my Twitter that I joined the 'hate wagon' when I called SW:BF2 pay to win right after the end of the beta and months later I still can't stop laughing on those guys. The little concern people have about the fairness of a game, even more, when real money is involved is fascinating, to say the least.
And what is wrong with my random ss? The gauntlet is random as well, as your ss demonstrated.
A mild bias toward defense also means I get a mild bias to maintaining my rank. What do you think the Gauntlet would look like if it was even or favourable odds?
You throwing at random screenshots just shows that you are momentarily frustrated with the Gauntlet and nothing else. Just like most of the other people who make Gauntlet posts. I on the other hand choose to do the Gauntlet just to get random loot. Since it does give me that, I am mostly content. It helps that I played it when it was the best source of extra chronitons and I am long used to its randomness.
Another day another miracle.
5% vs 5%
I love when people say. "Well in X number of rounds this might happens".
Sure, no problem. The problem is, where are my miracle wins every damn round? Because nothing like that ever happened in more than 5k rounds in my favor.
I agree with you in principle... but in order to have miracle wins, you have to choose those matches in the first place. If you regularly optimize your matches to take a battle that favors your victory, you're probably not going to experience a miracle win.
However, if you stop caring and just throw your crew out without much hope, miracle wins do sometimes happen. Certainly not as often as these kind of bad beats, but again that's partially due to the matches a player selects.
That said, the crit system is frequently unbelievable in it's results. Current gauntlet with a 65% crit Mariachi Q crits 0/3 to 5% crit non-FE Caretaker crits 2/3. Sure, it's a possible result. Sure I experience this for defenders more often partially because of match selection bias. But I also do throw-away matches around 40% of the time and don't see low odds wins anywhere in the same neighborhood of frequency of low odds losses.
There's a lot of cognitive bias that goes into shaping perceptions of the Gauntlet. But even after attempting to correct for bias, it's pretty obvious that many elements of the system are rigged against the player in order to encourage spending... One could almost say that is the point of this whole game?
The thing is if with optimized choices things like that happen, imagine going suicidal? And going optimally would lead to 'massacres' from time to time, like my Faith Garland ROFLSTOMPING that Gowron with 3-4 crits. Now ask me if I ever saw that happening?
I had my fair share of 'suicidal' rounds when my crew was very limited and poor and I never saw anything like that.
We're in general agreement that DB has a very heavy thumb on the scale when it comes to aspects of Gauntlet, the crit system in particular in this instance.
My point of contention is that players are likely to experience more bad beats than miracle wins due to optimizing for wins instead of playing with, shall I say, less attachment. If you select for wins and expect to win, you're probably going to make note of and feel losses much more significantly. Think of it as Data's first strategma match vs Kolrami compared to Data's strategma rematch vs. Kolrami, if you will.
I'm likely doing more throw-away battles than the average player, and that's because I don't see a significant net gain to optimizing matches for streak rewards or trophies. A fair amount of my 40% of throwaway matches are hopeless, but not all of them are.
Top 10 finishes and streaks of 30+ never got me a Locutus, so if gauntlet exclusive characters or high value equipment is your thing, I question if that's really optimizing the playing experience. As I've said elsewhere, I will occasionally chase a beatable opponent for matches 3, 6, 9, and 12, but mostly I want the certainty of merits not the likelihood of blue trainers.
All I can tell you is that I have personally seen a number of miracle wins when I had no business winning a match, even for matches that reward streak boxes (though this is significantly more rare). Granted, they are still a surprise to me when they happen. I hate to be that "believe me" drone, but I don't generally bother with screenshoting the game, so I guess there's that. Next one I see though, I'll try to remember to screenshot, even if it is a generally isolated, largely meaningless data point.
But if the system was truly 'blind' to who is doing what no matter if you are going suicidal or not you should experience the same amount of crits out of the blue as those defenders. That is the point.
A lot of times, like now with all those Qs making impossible to win DIP+SEC I simply play to gain rounds towards the achievement, my FE Duelist Yar, for example, never did what that Gowron did,now or in past rounds which I simply played her against really hard odds to progress in the achievement.
If you think its truly rigged against you why don't you do actual data collection instead of posting random screen shots when the Gauntlet doesn't go your way.
If you try to pull wins out of your *Vegan Poutine*, you will sometimes do just that but that only happens when you don't care or are just desperate.
I wasn't expecting Doc Crusher with 2 Fatigue levels and a 25% crit chance to win against Q's 65%. I just cheerfully collected my extra gauntlet round and carried on.
Because someone already did and found a bias toward the defenders. But here people are too concern in ignore that, called 'mild' and give a lot of excuses for the devs instead to claim a more transparent system. Especially because involves money. But then people said on my Twitter that I joined the 'hate wagon' when I called SW:BF2 pay to win right after the end of the beta and months later I still can't stop laughing on those guys. The little concern people have about the fairness of a game, even more, when real money is involved is fascinating, to say the least.
And what is wrong with my random ss? The gauntlet is random as well, as your ss demonstrated.
A mild bias toward defense also means I get a mild bias to maintaining my rank. What do you think the Gauntlet would look like if it was even or favourable odds?
You throwing at random screenshots just shows that you are momentarily frustrated with the Gauntlet and nothing else. Just like most of the other people who make Gauntlet posts. I on the other hand choose to do the Gauntlet just to get random loot. Since it does give me that, I am mostly content. It helps that I played it when it was the best source of extra chronitons and I am long used to its randomness.
Please, stop right now with the 'you are frustrated therefore your arguments are invalid'. Can you read my mind? Did I have said anything about frustration or why I play that specific game mode? And what my intention in playing said game mode will shape the outcome of the matches? Especially when 0 skills are involved aside the skill to elect who I will put to play that round?
If you need to go to 'cognitive bias' and unending excuses to justify the behavior of a game mode is because, first of all, is terribly designed. And, sorry, I'm too seasoned in games, many of them way more complex than this one to not notice after several matches that usually the defenders crit out of the blue in a more consistent way than me. The random pictures are just to illustrate the best(or worse)of those situations. But then, some people will swear the game industry is not filled with shady practices, anything that we found major developers like BUNGIE or publishers like EA and even Activision, that requested a patent for a matchmaking system that will manipulate you in order to make you do more microtransactions, will convince some people that they are pouring money and time in some rigged scheme or at least badly done game. Purposefully or not.
In the worse case scenario is rigged, but if it's not and I hope it's not is terribly designed. Then do it better. Simple like that.
Another day another miracle.
5% vs 5%
I love when people say. "Well in X number of rounds this might happens".
Sure, no problem. The problem is, where are my miracle wins every damn round? Because nothing like that ever happened in more than 5k rounds in my favor.
I agree with you in principle... but in order to have miracle wins, you have to choose those matches in the first place. If you regularly optimize your matches to take a battle that favors your victory, you're probably not going to experience a miracle win.
However, if you stop caring and just throw your crew out without much hope, miracle wins do sometimes happen. Certainly not as often as these kind of bad beats, but again that's partially due to the matches a player selects.
That said, the crit system is frequently unbelievable in it's results. Current gauntlet with a 65% crit Mariachi Q crits 0/3 to 5% crit non-FE Caretaker crits 2/3. Sure, it's a possible result. Sure I experience this for defenders more often partially because of match selection bias. But I also do throw-away matches around 40% of the time and don't see low odds wins anywhere in the same neighborhood of frequency of low odds losses.
There's a lot of cognitive bias that goes into shaping perceptions of the Gauntlet. But even after attempting to correct for bias, it's pretty obvious that many elements of the system are rigged against the player in order to encourage spending... One could almost say that is the point of this whole game?
The thing is if with optimized choices things like that happen, imagine going suicidal? And going optimally would lead to 'massacres' from time to time, like my Faith Garland ROFLSTOMPING that Gowron with 3-4 crits. Now ask me if I ever saw that happening?
I had my fair share of 'suicidal' rounds when my crew was very limited and poor and I never saw anything like that.
We're in general agreement that DB has a very heavy thumb on the scale when it comes to aspects of Gauntlet, the crit system in particular in this instance.
My point of contention is that players are likely to experience more bad beats than miracle wins due to optimizing for wins instead of playing with, shall I say, less attachment. If you select for wins and expect to win, you're probably going to make note of and feel losses much more significantly. Think of it as Data's first strategma match vs Kolrami compared to Data's strategma rematch vs. Kolrami, if you will.
I'm likely doing more throw-away battles than the average player, and that's because I don't see a significant net gain to optimizing matches for streak rewards or trophies. A fair amount of my 40% of throwaway matches are hopeless, but not all of them are.
Top 10 finishes and streaks of 30+ never got me a Locutus, so if gauntlet exclusive characters or high value equipment is your thing, I question if that's really optimizing the playing experience. As I've said elsewhere, I will occasionally chase a beatable opponent for matches 3, 6, 9, and 12, but mostly I want the certainty of merits not the likelihood of blue trainers.
All I can tell you is that I have personally seen a number of miracle wins when I had no business winning a match, even for matches that reward streak boxes (though this is significantly more rare). Granted, they are still a surprise to me when they happen. I hate to be that "believe me" drone, but I don't generally bother with screenshoting the game, so I guess there's that. Next one I see though, I'll try to remember to screenshot, even if it is a generally isolated, largely meaningless data point.
But if the system was truly 'blind' to who is doing what no matter if you are going suicidal or not you should experience the same amount of crits out of the blue as those defenders. That is the point.
A lot of times, like now with all those Qs making impossible to win DIP+SEC I simply play to gain rounds towards the achievement, my FE Duelist Yar, for example, never did what that Gowron did,now or in past rounds which I simply played her against really hard odds to progress in the achievement.
If you think its truly rigged against you why don't you do actual data collection instead of posting random screen shots when the Gauntlet doesn't go your way.
If you try to pull wins out of your *Vegan Poutine*, you will sometimes do just that but that only happens when you don't care or are just desperate.
I wasn't expecting Doc Crusher with 2 Fatigue levels and a 25% crit chance to win against Q's 65%. I just cheerfully collected my extra gauntlet round and carried on.
Because someone already did and found a bias toward the defenders. But here people are too concern in ignore that, called 'mild' and give a lot of excuses for the devs instead to claim a more transparent system. Especially because involves money. But then people said on my Twitter that I joined the 'hate wagon' when I called SW:BF2 pay to win right after the end of the beta and months later I still can't stop laughing on those guys. The little concern people have about the fairness of a game, even more, when real money is involved is fascinating, to say the least.
And what is wrong with my random ss? The gauntlet is random as well, as your ss demonstrated.
A mild bias toward defense also means I get a mild bias to maintaining my rank. What do you think the Gauntlet would look like if it was even or favourable odds?
You throwing at random screenshots just shows that you are momentarily frustrated with the Gauntlet and nothing else. Just like most of the other people who make Gauntlet posts. I on the other hand choose to do the Gauntlet just to get random loot. Since it does give me that, I am mostly content. It helps that I played it when it was the best source of extra chronitons and I am long used to its randomness.
Please, stop right now with the 'you are frustrated therefore your arguments are invalid'.
You arguments are invalid because you just post random screenshots and complain about it. Instead could you at least do the rest of us the simple favour of logging the results of a series of gauntlet matches? Let's say 50 straight matches. Its probably not a statistically sound way of doing things but at least its a start. That roughly 3-4 rounds depending on how lucky you get. Its certainly a huge improvement over random screenshots.
I don't not know if the Gauntlet is actually rigged but any rigged PvP system works for and against you. In the mean time, I will continue to collect loot in the gauntlet using crew that can still be used for other in game functions.
Another day another miracle.
5% vs 5%
I love when people say. "Well in X number of rounds this might happens".
Sure, no problem. The problem is, where are my miracle wins every damn round? Because nothing like that ever happened in more than 5k rounds in my favor.
I agree with you in principle... but in order to have miracle wins, you have to choose those matches in the first place. If you regularly optimize your matches to take a battle that favors your victory, you're probably not going to experience a miracle win.
However, if you stop caring and just throw your crew out without much hope, miracle wins do sometimes happen. Certainly not as often as these kind of bad beats, but again that's partially due to the matches a player selects.
That said, the crit system is frequently unbelievable in it's results. Current gauntlet with a 65% crit Mariachi Q crits 0/3 to 5% crit non-FE Caretaker crits 2/3. Sure, it's a possible result. Sure I experience this for defenders more often partially because of match selection bias. But I also do throw-away matches around 40% of the time and don't see low odds wins anywhere in the same neighborhood of frequency of low odds losses.
There's a lot of cognitive bias that goes into shaping perceptions of the Gauntlet. But even after attempting to correct for bias, it's pretty obvious that many elements of the system are rigged against the player in order to encourage spending... One could almost say that is the point of this whole game?
The thing is if with optimized choices things like that happen, imagine going suicidal? And going optimally would lead to 'massacres' from time to time, like my Faith Garland ROFLSTOMPING that Gowron with 3-4 crits. Now ask me if I ever saw that happening?
I had my fair share of 'suicidal' rounds when my crew was very limited and poor and I never saw anything like that.
We're in general agreement that DB has a very heavy thumb on the scale when it comes to aspects of Gauntlet, the crit system in particular in this instance.
My point of contention is that players are likely to experience more bad beats than miracle wins due to optimizing for wins instead of playing with, shall I say, less attachment. If you select for wins and expect to win, you're probably going to make note of and feel losses much more significantly. Think of it as Data's first strategma match vs Kolrami compared to Data's strategma rematch vs. Kolrami, if you will.
I'm likely doing more throw-away battles than the average player, and that's because I don't see a significant net gain to optimizing matches for streak rewards or trophies. A fair amount of my 40% of throwaway matches are hopeless, but not all of them are.
Top 10 finishes and streaks of 30+ never got me a Locutus, so if gauntlet exclusive characters or high value equipment is your thing, I question if that's really optimizing the playing experience. As I've said elsewhere, I will occasionally chase a beatable opponent for matches 3, 6, 9, and 12, but mostly I want the certainty of merits not the likelihood of blue trainers.
All I can tell you is that I have personally seen a number of miracle wins when I had no business winning a match, even for matches that reward streak boxes (though this is significantly more rare). Granted, they are still a surprise to me when they happen. I hate to be that "believe me" drone, but I don't generally bother with screenshoting the game, so I guess there's that. Next one I see though, I'll try to remember to screenshot, even if it is a generally isolated, largely meaningless data point.
But if the system was truly 'blind' to who is doing what no matter if you are going suicidal or not you should experience the same amount of crits out of the blue as those defenders. That is the point.
A lot of times, like now with all those Qs making impossible to win DIP+SEC I simply play to gain rounds towards the achievement, my FE Duelist Yar, for example, never did what that Gowron did,now or in past rounds which I simply played her against really hard odds to progress in the achievement.
If you think its truly rigged against you why don't you do actual data collection instead of posting random screen shots when the Gauntlet doesn't go your way.
If you try to pull wins out of your *Vegan Poutine*, you will sometimes do just that but that only happens when you don't care or are just desperate.
I wasn't expecting Doc Crusher with 2 Fatigue levels and a 25% crit chance to win against Q's 65%. I just cheerfully collected my extra gauntlet round and carried on.
Because someone already did and found a bias toward the defenders. But here people are too concern in ignore that, called 'mild' and give a lot of excuses for the devs instead to claim a more transparent system. Especially because involves money. But then people said on my Twitter that I joined the 'hate wagon' when I called SW:BF2 pay to win right after the end of the beta and months later I still can't stop laughing on those guys. The little concern people have about the fairness of a game, even more, when real money is involved is fascinating, to say the least.
And what is wrong with my random ss? The gauntlet is random as well, as your ss demonstrated.
A mild bias toward defense also means I get a mild bias to maintaining my rank. What do you think the Gauntlet would look like if it was even or favourable odds?
You throwing at random screenshots just shows that you are momentarily frustrated with the Gauntlet and nothing else. Just like most of the other people who make Gauntlet posts. I on the other hand choose to do the Gauntlet just to get random loot. Since it does give me that, I am mostly content. It helps that I played it when it was the best source of extra chronitons and I am long used to its randomness.
Please, stop right now with the 'you are frustrated therefore your arguments are invalid'.
You arguments are invalid because you just post random screenshots and complain about it. Instead could you at least do the rest of us the simple favour of logging the results of a series of gauntlet matches? Let's say 50 straight matches. Its probably not a statistically sound way of doing things but at least its a start. That roughly 3-4 rounds depending on how lucky you get. Its certainly a huge improvement over random screenshots.
I don't not know if the Gauntlet is actually rigged but any rigged PvP system works for and against you. In the mean time, I will continue to collect loot in the gauntlet using crew that can still be used for other in game functions.
And what arguments do you have? "Oh, I got what I want so or I don't care or is working as intended".
Another day another miracle.
5% vs 5%
I love when people say. "Well in X number of rounds this might happens".
Sure, no problem. The problem is, where are my miracle wins every damn round? Because nothing like that ever happened in more than 5k rounds in my favor.
I agree with you in principle... but in order to have miracle wins, you have to choose those matches in the first place. If you regularly optimize your matches to take a battle that favors your victory, you're probably not going to experience a miracle win.
However, if you stop caring and just throw your crew out without much hope, miracle wins do sometimes happen. Certainly not as often as these kind of bad beats, but again that's partially due to the matches a player selects.
That said, the crit system is frequently unbelievable in it's results. Current gauntlet with a 65% crit Mariachi Q crits 0/3 to 5% crit non-FE Caretaker crits 2/3. Sure, it's a possible result. Sure I experience this for defenders more often partially because of match selection bias. But I also do throw-away matches around 40% of the time and don't see low odds wins anywhere in the same neighborhood of frequency of low odds losses.
There's a lot of cognitive bias that goes into shaping perceptions of the Gauntlet. But even after attempting to correct for bias, it's pretty obvious that many elements of the system are rigged against the player in order to encourage spending... One could almost say that is the point of this whole game?
The thing is if with optimized choices things like that happen, imagine going suicidal? And going optimally would lead to 'massacres' from time to time, like my Faith Garland ROFLSTOMPING that Gowron with 3-4 crits. Now ask me if I ever saw that happening?
I had my fair share of 'suicidal' rounds when my crew was very limited and poor and I never saw anything like that.
We're in general agreement that DB has a very heavy thumb on the scale when it comes to aspects of Gauntlet, the crit system in particular in this instance.
My point of contention is that players are likely to experience more bad beats than miracle wins due to optimizing for wins instead of playing with, shall I say, less attachment. If you select for wins and expect to win, you're probably going to make note of and feel losses much more significantly. Think of it as Data's first strategma match vs Kolrami compared to Data's strategma rematch vs. Kolrami, if you will.
I'm likely doing more throw-away battles than the average player, and that's because I don't see a significant net gain to optimizing matches for streak rewards or trophies. A fair amount of my 40% of throwaway matches are hopeless, but not all of them are.
Top 10 finishes and streaks of 30+ never got me a Locutus, so if gauntlet exclusive characters or high value equipment is your thing, I question if that's really optimizing the playing experience. As I've said elsewhere, I will occasionally chase a beatable opponent for matches 3, 6, 9, and 12, but mostly I want the certainty of merits not the likelihood of blue trainers.
All I can tell you is that I have personally seen a number of miracle wins when I had no business winning a match, even for matches that reward streak boxes (though this is significantly more rare). Granted, they are still a surprise to me when they happen. I hate to be that "believe me" drone, but I don't generally bother with screenshoting the game, so I guess there's that. Next one I see though, I'll try to remember to screenshot, even if it is a generally isolated, largely meaningless data point.
But if the system was truly 'blind' to who is doing what no matter if you are going suicidal or not you should experience the same amount of crits out of the blue as those defenders. That is the point.
A lot of times, like now with all those Qs making impossible to win DIP+SEC I simply play to gain rounds towards the achievement, my FE Duelist Yar, for example, never did what that Gowron did,now or in past rounds which I simply played her against really hard odds to progress in the achievement.
Well, here's the thing about your blindness theory... Those crits probably are happening, you're likely not observing them as significant because they happen in matches you win/expect to win anyways. A couple days back I had a 5% fatigued Kahless crit 6/6. I almost did screenshot that it was so unexpected. And yes, I won that match despite it probably being close to 50/50 odds.
There's probably no system created and used by humans that can ever really be totally neutral. There's always going to be subjective interpretation, which is why I brought up cognitive bias despite the otherwise relative agreement of our respective positions.
As I wouldn't even rate myself an armchair statistician, I'm not sure what a good study of Gauntlet would look like. But one thing is clear, even to a drone like me: a blind aggregate of match results is beyond flawed. I guess it's the easiest way to study Gauntlet, but it ignores too many variables. While I appreciate that one study did detect a defender bias, another did not. Best to ignore the weeds altogether.
At this point, it's on those of us who smell a rat to come up with and distribute better messaging that galvanizes the player base to alter their engagement and spending patterns--ie the only thing DB generally listens too. DB clearly is not going to do it on their own, even if they do occasionally show some improvement.
Obviously some people will never listen, have to be contrary, or are too whatever to get it, but the part of your OP that got me posting was as flawed as DBNG: miracle wins, crits, and match selections do happen if you're watching and selecting for them. You didn't start out saying that they should happen as often as bad beats, you said they never happen (to you). They're not going to happen every round and almost certainly do not happen as often as bad beats, but outright denying their existence is spitting into the wind. This remains my one and only point of contention between us.
By all means though, continue to push for DB to be more transparent and provide a more fair gaming experience. And thank you for the dialogue, I appreciate where you're coming from even if we do have a minor difference of opinion.
Another day another miracle.
5% vs 5%
I love when people say. "Well in X number of rounds this might happens".
Sure, no problem. The problem is, where are my miracle wins every damn round? Because nothing like that ever happened in more than 5k rounds in my favor.
I agree with you in principle... but in order to have miracle wins, you have to choose those matches in the first place. If you regularly optimize your matches to take a battle that favors your victory, you're probably not going to experience a miracle win.
However, if you stop caring and just throw your crew out without much hope, miracle wins do sometimes happen. Certainly not as often as these kind of bad beats, but again that's partially due to the matches a player selects.
That said, the crit system is frequently unbelievable in it's results. Current gauntlet with a 65% crit Mariachi Q crits 0/3 to 5% crit non-FE Caretaker crits 2/3. Sure, it's a possible result. Sure I experience this for defenders more often partially because of match selection bias. But I also do throw-away matches around 40% of the time and don't see low odds wins anywhere in the same neighborhood of frequency of low odds losses.
There's a lot of cognitive bias that goes into shaping perceptions of the Gauntlet. But even after attempting to correct for bias, it's pretty obvious that many elements of the system are rigged against the player in order to encourage spending... One could almost say that is the point of this whole game?
The thing is if with optimized choices things like that happen, imagine going suicidal? And going optimally would lead to 'massacres' from time to time, like my Faith Garland ROFLSTOMPING that Gowron with 3-4 crits. Now ask me if I ever saw that happening?
I had my fair share of 'suicidal' rounds when my crew was very limited and poor and I never saw anything like that.
We're in general agreement that DB has a very heavy thumb on the scale when it comes to aspects of Gauntlet, the crit system in particular in this instance.
My point of contention is that players are likely to experience more bad beats than miracle wins due to optimizing for wins instead of playing with, shall I say, less attachment. If you select for wins and expect to win, you're probably going to make note of and feel losses much more significantly. Think of it as Data's first strategma match vs Kolrami compared to Data's strategma rematch vs. Kolrami, if you will.
I'm likely doing more throw-away battles than the average player, and that's because I don't see a significant net gain to optimizing matches for streak rewards or trophies. A fair amount of my 40% of throwaway matches are hopeless, but not all of them are.
Top 10 finishes and streaks of 30+ never got me a Locutus, so if gauntlet exclusive characters or high value equipment is your thing, I question if that's really optimizing the playing experience. As I've said elsewhere, I will occasionally chase a beatable opponent for matches 3, 6, 9, and 12, but mostly I want the certainty of merits not the likelihood of blue trainers.
All I can tell you is that I have personally seen a number of miracle wins when I had no business winning a match, even for matches that reward streak boxes (though this is significantly more rare). Granted, they are still a surprise to me when they happen. I hate to be that "believe me" drone, but I don't generally bother with screenshoting the game, so I guess there's that. Next one I see though, I'll try to remember to screenshot, even if it is a generally isolated, largely meaningless data point.
But if the system was truly 'blind' to who is doing what no matter if you are going suicidal or not you should experience the same amount of crits out of the blue as those defenders. That is the point.
A lot of times, like now with all those Qs making impossible to win DIP+SEC I simply play to gain rounds towards the achievement, my FE Duelist Yar, for example, never did what that Gowron did,now or in past rounds which I simply played her against really hard odds to progress in the achievement.
Well, here's the thing about your blindness theory... Those crits probably are happening, you're likely not observing them as significant because they happen in matches you win/expect to win anyways. A couple days back I had a 5% fatigued Kahless crit 6/6. I almost did screenshot that it was so unexpected. And yes, I won that match despite it probably being close to 50/50 odds.
There's probably no system created and used by humans that can ever really be totally neutral. There's always going to be subjective interpretation, which is why I brought up cognitive bias despite the otherwise relative agreement of our respective positions.
As I wouldn't even rate myself an armchair statistician, I'm not sure what a good study of Gauntlet would look like. But one thing is clear, even to a drone like me: a blind aggregate of match results is beyond flawed. I guess it's the easiest way to study Gauntlet, but it ignores too many variables. While I appreciate that one study did detect a defender bias, another did not. Best to ignore the weeds altogether.
At this point, it's on those of us who smell a rat to come up with and distribute better messaging that galvanizes the player base to alter their engagement and spending patterns--ie the only thing DB generally listens too. DB clearly is not going to do it on their own, even if they do occasionally show some improvement.
Obviously some people will never listen, have to be contrary, or are too whatever to get it, but the part of your OP that got me posting was as flawed as DBNG: miracle wins, crits, and match selections do happen if you're watching and selecting for them. You didn't start out saying that they should happen as often as bad beats, you said they never happen (to you). They're not going to happen every round and almost certainly do not happen as often as bad beats, but outright denying their existence is spitting into the wind. This remains my one and only point of contention between us.
By all means though, continue to push for DB to be more transparent and provide a more fair gaming experience. And thank you for the dialogue, I appreciate where you're coming from even if we do have a minor difference of opinion.
I agree, some of those crits probably are passing under the radar because they happen on 'certain win' scenarios. Said that we should at least notice something on mirror matches and purely using the anecdotal experience I can say that probably my ratio of wins in such matches are not that great as many other players also seem to claim the same.
In the end, all boils down to a system not very well done. If we had some sort of log of win/lose and other statistics in the game all would be verified way easier and also would improve the overall enjoyment of the game for the people to like min/max and provide something to assure the game is fair. The same thing would be done to shuttles, another pit of terrible RNG plus some bugs.
I agree, some of those crits probably are passing under the radar because they happen on 'certain win' scenarios. Said that we should at least notice something on mirror matches and purely using the anecdotal experience I can say that probably my ratio of wins in such matches are not that great as many other players also seem to claim the same.
In the end, all boils down to a system not very well done. If we had some sort of log of win/lose and other statistics in the game all would be verified way easier and also would improve the overall enjoyment of the game for the people to like min/max and provide something to assure the game is fair. The same thing would be done to shuttles, another pit of terrible RNG plus some bugs.
Oh yeah, my experience of mirror matches is appallingly horrible. No where even close to 50/50 and I don't need match tracking or filtering for bias to see it. The only mirror match aggregate tracking I've seen is the poster child of poorly designed armchair statistical study.
I could be wrong, but the only way I see to get that dataset in the time frame it was presented was through dilithium and merit spending, which leads me to consider that heavy spending may in fact bias match results closer to 50/50. Which if you think about it, is about what you'd expect from an obvious P2W game.
I would love to see a log of stats for my in game performance vs. a system wide performance. But I can also see why DB won't offer that-- it'd be easier for players to track bad/bugged behavior of the system and allow more people to easily understand where the game is rigged.
I don't think DB is evil or nefarious as a company, they just want to control the narrative and make money. Currently the only way for them to lose control is when something angers the big spenders, and it usually takes that crowd spending bags of money to prove a problem exists in the first place.
Caretaker is a 71% favorite, at 5% crit chance each. I'll leave the question of whether you're missing something to others.
I like your dedication. But your math is WAY off. Your spreadsheet doesn't seem to cover the likelyhood of the crits.
In situations where a single crit can make a huge difference, you will find that the outer margins of your graphs will be MUCH flatter. This is why it's sometimes unlikely, but annoyingly possible for a char to outcrit your otherwise stronger char.
Comments
Of course it has to be from the mirror universe.
+1 Awesome
5% vs 5%
I love when people say. "Well in X number of rounds this might happens".
Sure, no problem. The problem is, where are my miracle wins every damn round? Because nothing like that ever happened in more than 5k rounds in my favor.
I agree with you in principle... but in order to have miracle wins, you have to choose those matches in the first place. If you regularly optimize your matches to take a battle that favors your victory, you're probably not going to experience a miracle win.
However, if you stop caring and just throw your crew out without much hope, miracle wins do sometimes happen. Certainly not as often as these kind of bad beats, but again that's partially due to the matches a player selects.
That said, the crit system is frequently unbelievable in it's results. Current gauntlet with a 65% crit Mariachi Q crits 0/3 to 5% crit non-FE Caretaker crits 2/3. Sure, it's a possible result. Sure I experience this for defenders more often partially because of match selection bias. But I also do throw-away matches around 40% of the time and don't see low odds wins anywhere in the same neighborhood of frequency of low odds losses.
There's a lot of cognitive bias that goes into shaping perceptions of the Gauntlet. But even after attempting to correct for bias, it's pretty obvious that many elements of the system are rigged against the player in order to encourage spending... One could almost say that is the point of this whole game?
The thing is if with optimized choices things like that happen, imagine going suicidal? And going optimally would lead to 'massacres' from time to time, like my Faith Garland ROFLSTOMPING that Gowron with 3-4 crits. Now ask me if I ever saw that happening?
I had my fair share of 'suicidal' rounds when my crew was very limited and poor and I never saw anything like that.
We're in general agreement that DB has a very heavy thumb on the scale when it comes to aspects of Gauntlet, the crit system in particular in this instance.
My point of contention is that players are likely to experience more bad beats than miracle wins due to optimizing for wins instead of playing with, shall I say, less attachment. If you select for wins and expect to win, you're probably going to make note of and feel losses much more significantly. Think of it as Data's first strategma match vs Kolrami compared to Data's strategma rematch vs. Kolrami, if you will.
I'm likely doing more throw-away battles than the average player, and that's because I don't see a significant net gain to optimizing matches for streak rewards or trophies. A fair amount of my 40% of throwaway matches are hopeless, but not all of them are.
Top 10 finishes and streaks of 30+ never got me a Locutus, so if gauntlet exclusive characters or high value equipment is your thing, I question if that's really optimizing the playing experience. As I've said elsewhere, I will occasionally chase a beatable opponent for matches 3, 6, 9, and 12, but mostly I want the certainty of merits not the likelihood of blue trainers.
All I can tell you is that I have personally seen a number of miracle wins when I had no business winning a match, even for matches that reward streak boxes (though this is significantly more rare). Granted, they are still a surprise to me when they happen. I hate to be that "believe me" drone, but I don't generally bother with screenshoting the game, so I guess there's that. Next one I see though, I'll try to remember to screenshot, even if it is a generally isolated, largely meaningless data point.
Speaking of not taking screenshots, I saw a Mariachi Q with no matching skills today and matched up my own for fun. I won 5-4 scoring a 2 on the first roll. Brought a smile to my face. 😀
But if the system was truly 'blind' to who is doing what no matter if you are going suicidal or not you should experience the same amount of crits out of the blue as those defenders. That is the point.
A lot of times, like now with all those Qs making impossible to win DIP+SEC I simply play to gain rounds towards the achievement, my FE Duelist Yar, for example, never did what that Gowron did,now or in past rounds which I simply played her against really hard odds to progress in the achievement.
If you think its truly rigged against you why don't you do actual data collection instead of posting random screen shots when the Gauntlet doesn't go your way.
If you try to pull wins out of your **tsk tsk**, you will sometimes do just that but that only happens when you don't care or are just desperate.
I wasn't expecting Doc Crusher with 2 Fatigue levels and a 25% crit chance to win against Q's 65%. I just cheerfully collected my extra gauntlet round and carried on.
Because someone already did and found a bias toward the defenders. But here people are too concerned about ignoring that, called 'mild' and give a lot of excuses for the devs instead to claim a more transparent system. Especially because involves money. But then people said on my Twitter that I joined the 'hate wagon' when I called SW:BF2 pay to win right after the end of the beta and months later I still can't stop laughing on those guys. The little concern people have about the fairness of a game, even more, when real money is involved is fascinating, to say the least.
And what is wrong with my random ss? The gauntlet is random as well, as your ss demonstrated.
A mild bias toward defense also means I get a mild bias to maintaining my rank. What do you think the Gauntlet would look like if it was even or favourable odds?
You throwing at random screenshots just shows that you are momentarily frustrated with the Gauntlet and nothing else. Just like most of the other people who make Gauntlet posts. I on the other hand choose to do the Gauntlet just to get random loot. Since it does give me that, I am mostly content. It helps that I played it when it was the best source of extra chronitons and I am long used to its randomness.
Please, stop right now with the 'you are frustrated therefore your arguments are invalid'. Can you read my mind? Did I have said anything about frustration or why I play that specific game mode? And what my intention in playing said game mode will shape the outcome of the matches? Especially when 0 skills are involved aside the skill to elect who I will put to play that round?
If you need to go to 'cognitive bias' and unending excuses to justify the behavior of a game mode is because, first of all, is terribly designed. And, sorry, I'm too seasoned in games, many of them way more complex than this one to not notice after several matches that usually the defenders crit out of the blue in a more consistent way than me. The random pictures are just to illustrate the best(or worse)of those situations. But then, some people will swear the game industry is not filled with shady practices, anything that we found major developers like BUNGIE or publishers like EA and even Activision, that requested a patent for a matchmaking system that will manipulate you in order to make you do more microtransactions, will convince some people that they are pouring money and time in some rigged scheme or at least badly done game. Purposefully or not.
In the worse case scenario is rigged, but if it's not and I hope it's not is terribly designed. Then do it better. Simple like that.
You arguments are invalid because you just post random screenshots and complain about it. Instead could you at least do the rest of us the simple favour of logging the results of a series of gauntlet matches? Let's say 50 straight matches. Its probably not a statistically sound way of doing things but at least its a start. That roughly 3-4 rounds depending on how lucky you get. Its certainly a huge improvement over random screenshots.
I don't not know if the Gauntlet is actually rigged but any rigged PvP system works for and against you. In the mean time, I will continue to collect loot in the gauntlet using crew that can still be used for other in game functions.
And what arguments do you have? "Oh, I got what I want so or I don't care or is working as intended".
Great, seems legit.
Well, here's the thing about your blindness theory... Those crits probably are happening, you're likely not observing them as significant because they happen in matches you win/expect to win anyways. A couple days back I had a 5% fatigued Kahless crit 6/6. I almost did screenshot that it was so unexpected. And yes, I won that match despite it probably being close to 50/50 odds.
There's probably no system created and used by humans that can ever really be totally neutral. There's always going to be subjective interpretation, which is why I brought up cognitive bias despite the otherwise relative agreement of our respective positions.
As I wouldn't even rate myself an armchair statistician, I'm not sure what a good study of Gauntlet would look like. But one thing is clear, even to a drone like me: a blind aggregate of match results is beyond flawed. I guess it's the easiest way to study Gauntlet, but it ignores too many variables. While I appreciate that one study did detect a defender bias, another did not. Best to ignore the weeds altogether.
At this point, it's on those of us who smell a rat to come up with and distribute better messaging that galvanizes the player base to alter their engagement and spending patterns--ie the only thing DB generally listens too. DB clearly is not going to do it on their own, even if they do occasionally show some improvement.
Obviously some people will never listen, have to be contrary, or are too whatever to get it, but the part of your OP that got me posting was as flawed as DBNG: miracle wins, crits, and match selections do happen if you're watching and selecting for them. You didn't start out saying that they should happen as often as bad beats, you said they never happen (to you). They're not going to happen every round and almost certainly do not happen as often as bad beats, but outright denying their existence is spitting into the wind. This remains my one and only point of contention between us.
By all means though, continue to push for DB to be more transparent and provide a more fair gaming experience. And thank you for the dialogue, I appreciate where you're coming from even if we do have a minor difference of opinion.
I agree, some of those crits probably are passing under the radar because they happen on 'certain win' scenarios. Said that we should at least notice something on mirror matches and purely using the anecdotal experience I can say that probably my ratio of wins in such matches are not that great as many other players also seem to claim the same.
In the end, all boils down to a system not very well done. If we had some sort of log of win/lose and other statistics in the game all would be verified way easier and also would improve the overall enjoyment of the game for the people to like min/max and provide something to assure the game is fair. The same thing would be done to shuttles, another pit of terrible RNG plus some bugs.
2x fatigued 45% crit Chaotica (top value around 286 IIRC) vs 25% crit Sarek (don't think it was FE, but still over 530 top value at least)
2x fatigued 25% crit Sulan (~150-500) vs 5% crit Mirror Troi (~256-624)
Back to back. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Guess I'll get a lotto ticket.
Oh yeah, my experience of mirror matches is appallingly horrible. No where even close to 50/50 and I don't need match tracking or filtering for bias to see it. The only mirror match aggregate tracking I've seen is the poster child of poorly designed armchair statistical study.
I could be wrong, but the only way I see to get that dataset in the time frame it was presented was through dilithium and merit spending, which leads me to consider that heavy spending may in fact bias match results closer to 50/50. Which if you think about it, is about what you'd expect from an obvious P2W game.
I would love to see a log of stats for my in game performance vs. a system wide performance. But I can also see why DB won't offer that-- it'd be easier for players to track bad/bugged behavior of the system and allow more people to easily understand where the game is rigged.
I don't think DB is evil or nefarious as a company, they just want to control the narrative and make money. Currently the only way for them to lose control is when something angers the big spenders, and it usually takes that crowd spending bags of money to prove a problem exists in the first place.
I like your dedication. But your math is WAY off. Your spreadsheet doesn't seem to cover the likelyhood of the crits.
In situations where a single crit can make a huge difference, you will find that the outer margins of your graphs will be MUCH flatter. This is why it's sometimes unlikely, but annoyingly possible for a char to outcrit your otherwise stronger char.